Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Literacy coaching as a component of professional development

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Current debates concerning effective professional development for teachers of early reading have focused on the potential benefits of a literacy coach in providing sustained support and guidance for teachers’ learning from a professional development program. In this study, we compare the response of first-grade teachers to a model of professional development that did or did not include a literacy coach (i.e., PD Coach or PD No Coach) by examining teachers’ attitudes toward professional development, their instruction, and student outcomes. We also take into account teachers’ views about their school climate, as these might influence their response to professional development activities. Results showed no differences in teachers’ attitudes toward the professional development, the support of their principal, or opportunities for collaboration with other teachers. The PD Coach teachers differed from the PD No Coach teachers in aspects of instruction relevant to the professional development program. Further, students in PD Coach teachers’ classrooms made greater improvements in word decoding from fall to spring. The support of the principal contributed to these outcomes. The results suggest benefits of a model of professional development in reading that included school-based coaching for first-grade teachers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Three teachers did not have valid scores on the principal factor and were thus dropped.

  2. One teacher did not have winter observation information and was thus dropped from the analysis.

References

  • Anders, P. L., & Bos, C. S. (1992). Dimensions of professional development: Weaving teaching beliefs and strategic content. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in schools (pp. 457–476). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S., & Smith, S. (1999). Starting off on the right foot: The influence of four principles of professional development in improving literacy instruction in two kindergarten programs. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14, 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bean, R. M. (2004). The reading specialist: Leadership for the classroom, school, and community. NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berebitsky, D., Goddard, R. D., Carlisle, J., & Feng, D. (2009). Examining the association between principals’ support for change and teachers’ communication around literacy in Michigan’s Reading First schools. Paper presented at the Annual American Education Research Association Conference, San Diego, CA: April 14, 2009.

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33, 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, C. S., Mather, N., Narr, R. F., & Babur, N. (1999). Interactive, collaborative professional development in early literacy instruction: Supporting the balancing act. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14, 227–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, S., Gillis, M., Smith, T., Lavalette, M., Liss-Bronstein, L., Low, E., et al. (2009). First grade teachers’ knowledge of phonological awareness and code concepts: Examining gains from an intensive form of professional development and corresponding teacher attitudes. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brownell, M. T., Yeager, E., Rennells, M. S., & Riley, T. (1997). Teachers working together: What teacher educators and researchers should know. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20, 340–359.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, J. F., Katz, L. A., & Cortina, K. S. (In press). First grade teachers’ response to three models of professional development in reading. Reading and Writing Quarterly.

  • Cirino, P. T., Pollard-Durodola, S. D., Foorman, B. R., Carlson, C. D., & Francis, D. J. (2007). Teacher characteristics, classroom instruction, and student literacy and language outcomes in bilingual kindergartners. Elementary School Journal, 107, 341–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Instruction, capacity and improvement (CPRE Research Report Series, RR-43). University of Pennsylvania: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran, T., McVay, S., & Riordan, K. (2003). Getting it right: The MSIE approach to professional development (CPRE Report Series RR-055). University of Pennsylvania: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correnti, R. (2007). An empirical investigation of professional development effects on literacy instruction using daily logs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 262–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented? Review of Educational Research, 72, 433–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (2006). School reform from the inside out. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., et al. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Kwang, S. Y. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, R. H., Simmons, D., Kaminski, R. A., & Wallin, J. (2002). Summary of decision rules for intensive, strategic, and benchmark instructional recommendations in kindergarten through third grade (Technical Report No. 11). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Reading Association. (2004). The role and qualifications of the reading coach in the United States. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. E. (2002). High-performing, high-poverty urban elementary schools. In B. M. Taylor & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Teaching reading: Effective schools, accomplished teachers (pp. 89–114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juel, C., & Mindon-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 458–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, S. D., Louis, K. S., & Bryk, A. S. (1995). An emerging framework for analyzing school-based professional community. In K. S. Louis & S. D. Kruse (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools (pp. 23–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., Green, L., Abbott, R. D., & Sanders, E. A. (2009). Further evidence for teacher knowledge: Supporting struggling readers in grades three through five. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moats, L. (2003). Language essentials for teachers of reading and spelling. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, M., Fountain, A. R., Boulay, B., Horst, M., Rodger, C., & Brown-Lyons, M. (2008). Reading First implementation report: Final. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute for Child Health and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neufeld, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A strategy for developing instructional capacity. Cambridge, MA: Education Matters, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, D. C., Barry, A. L., & Staab, P. T. (2008). Teachers’ reflections of professional change during a literacy-reform initiative. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1288–1303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, V., & Datnow, A. (2008). Collaborative assistance in a highly prescribed school reform model: The case of success for all. Peabody Journal of Education, 83, 400–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poglinco, S. M., Bach, A. J., Hovde, K., Rosenblum, S., Saunders, M., & Supovitz, J. A. (2003). The heart of the matter: The coaching model in America’s choice schools. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy and Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Allington, R., Block, C. C., Morrow, L., Tracey, D., et al. (2001). A study of effective first-grade literacy instruction. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 35–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 905–947). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J. A., & Bruce, C. D. (2007). Teacher self-assessment: A mechanism for facilitating professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 146–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, S., Carlisle, J. F., Zeng, J., & Scott, S. (2007). Are fluency measures accurate predictors of reading achievement? Elementary School Journal, 107, 429–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2006). The essential supports for school improvement. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K., & Walpole, S. (2002). Effective schools and accomplished teachers: Lessons about primary grade reading instruction in low-income schools. In B. M. Taylor & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Teaching reading: Effective schools, accomplished teachers (pp. 3–72). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timperley, H. S., & Phillips, G. (2003). Changing and sustaining teachers’ expectations through professional development in literacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 627–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of Educational Administration, 39, 308–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Education. (2002). Guidance for the Reading First Program. Retrieved from www.ed.gov.

  • Van Keer, H., & Verhaeghe, J. P. (2005). Effects of explicit reading strategies instruction and peer tutoring on second and fifth graders’ reading comprehension and self-efficacy perception. Journal of Experimental Education, 73, 291–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2004). The literacy coach’s handbook: A guide to research-based practice. NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study of professional development was supported by a teacher quality grant from the Institute of Education Sciences to the first author. The Institute of Education Sciences is not responsible for the design or interpretation of the results of the study. We would like to thank the Reading First program directors in Michigan and the teachers in all of the participating schools for their interest in and support of this study. We also acknowledge the valuable assistance of Lauren Katz and Sarah Scott in overseeing the implementation of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Michigan, 610 E. University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Joanne F. Carlisle & Dan Berebitsky

Authors
  1. Joanne F. Carlisle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Berebitsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joanne F. Carlisle.

Appendix

Appendix

Items on surveys teachers’ completed

Attitudes towards professional development and workplace items

Most of what I learn in professional development addresses the needs of students in my classroom

Overall, my professional development experiences have been sustained and coherently focused, rather than short term and unrelated

Overall, my professional development experiences have led me to make changes in my teaching

Overall, my professional development experiences have helped me understand my students better

Overall, my professional development experiences have deepened my understanding of subject matter

Overall, my professional development experiences have been closely connected to my school’s improvement plan

Overall, my professional development experiences have included enough time to think carefully about, try, and evaluate new ideas

Overall, my professional development experiences have included opportunities to work productively with colleagues in my school

Overall, my professional development experiences have included opportunities to work productively with teachers from other schools

  1. Note: Eigen value = 4.86, 54.0% variance explained, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89

Communication around literacy items

Instructional leaders from my school have helped me understand how to use data from student assessment to make instructional decisions

In my school, there are frequent opportunities to share ideas about how to teach literacy better

My school has a systematic procedure for sharing and reporting student early literacy assessment data

There is poor building-level communication about children’s literacy achievement and about curriculum implementation (reversed in analysis)

Weekly grade level meetings are a valuable opportunity to collaborate with colleagues on issues related to literacy

  1. Note: Eigen value = 2.39, 47.9% variance explained, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.67

Principal’s support for change items

The principal at this school supports and encourages teachers to take risks

The principal at this school encourages teachers to try new methods of instruction

The principal at this school is willing to make changes

Most changes introduced at this school receive strong support from the principal

  1. Note: Eigen value = 3.19, 79.8% variance explained, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92

Reflective dialogue items

This school year, how often have you had conversations with colleagues about what helps students learn best?

Teachers in this school share and discuss student work with other teachers

This school year, how often have you had conversations with colleagues about the goals of this school?

This school year, how often have you had conversations with colleagues about development of new curriculum?

Teachers in this school regularly discuss assumptions about teaching and learning

Teachers talk about instruction in the teachers’ lounge, faculty meetings, etc.

This school year, how often have you had conversations with colleagues about managing classroom behavior?

  1. Note: Eigen value = 3.32, 47.4% variance explained, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.80

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carlisle, J.F., Berebitsky, D. Literacy coaching as a component of professional development. Read Writ 24, 773–800 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9224-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9224-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation