Introduction

Identifying appropriate responses to challenges in teaching and learning requires teachers to engage thoughtfully with quality professional literature (Broemmel et al., 2019; Kitchen et al., 2015). The importance of ongoing teacher professional learning to help teachers to construct contextually responsive insights in support of student learning is also well-established (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996; Grimmett, 2014; Groundwater-Smith & Mockler, 2009; Owen, 2011). In Australia and overseas, the professionalisation of teaching has involved the creation of policies and accreditation frameworks that assign both philosophical and practical importance to teachers being well-read and research-informed. For example, the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers require teachers to “plan for professional learning by accessing and critiquing relevant research” (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2011, p. 20). In the United Kingdom, the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development articulates the importance of reading “high-quality academic research, and robustly evaluated approaches” (Department for Education, 2016, p. 8) as part of professional learning. Likewise, in the United States, What Teachers Should Know and Be Able to Do suggests that teachers need to commit to professional reading to “stay abreast of current research and, when appropriate, incorporate new findings into their practice” (The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, 2016, p. 32). Notwithstanding these discourses, the complex nature of teaching itself drives some teachers to read as they seek to satisfy their professional curiosities, troubleshoot, problem-solve and innovate.

However, a problem that researchers have persistently identified over decades is the difficulties for teachers in establishing reading as a professional practice. Cogan and Anderson (1977) reported that “teachers don’t do much professional reading at all.” (p. 258) and Mour (1977) noted they read only one or two professional publications annually. Today, academics produce an impressive array of print and multimodal resources to disseminate research insights to teachers, including books, journal articles, teacher magazine articles, TED Talks, podcasts, and professional blogs. Still, studies exploring the frequency of teachers’ reading record the “disappointing participation of teachers in professional reading” (Kitchen et al., 2015, p. 67) and a preference within the profession to rely on intuition and experience over research literature (Broemmel et al., 2019). Moving from an intellectual understanding of theory to enactment in practice is much more complex than often assumed (Darling-Hammond & Snyder, 2000). One possible explanation is an absence of explicit and supportive sense-making activities that frame opportunities for teachers to see themselves and their problems of practice in what they are reading.

Hence, the conditions that seem to influence teachers’ motivation to read and help them to make sense of practical implications for their teaching practice warrant examination. A factor often cited in the literature is that teachers are time-poor and overwhelmed by the diverse and competing responsibilities and commitments within their working day (Carroll & Simmonds, 2009). Broemmel et al. (2019) and Walsh et al. (2022) have reported that when teachers do read for professional reasons, they do so in the evenings or on weekends, at the expense of family and recreation time. It is therefore understandable that teachers’ motivation to read aligns closely with the value they associate with reading. A perceived lack of immediate value to teaching practice (or, perhaps, difficulty seeing how ideas might be applied in their classrooms) is another factor that limits teachers’ professional reading (Kitchen et al., 2015). Carroll and Simmonds (2009) found that teachers want professional literature that “speaks directly to the problems they are facing today in their classrooms” or that provides advice that is “easy to modify and use” (p. 8).

Other factors that have been reported to limit teachers’ professional reading activity include: lack of familiarity with relevant journals (Carroll & Simmonds, 2009); difficulties locating and interpreting the quality of research evidence (Rickinson et al., 2021); and the technical language typical of academic publications (Stopper, 1982). As Kitchen et al. (2015) suggest, an absence of necessary infrastructure within schools, such as access to library databases and journal subscription services, and/or an absence of culture that encourages, supports and guides teacher reading can exacerbate these issues. Few studies (e.g. Broemmel et al., 2019; Womack & Chandler, 1992) explore strategies that support teachers to engage thoughtfully with professional reading and translate research insights into teaching practice. Rickinson et al. (2021) argue a need for strategies that support schools and teachers in this work. As Gravani (2007) notes, research that emphasises “the processes by which [teachers] grow professionally as well as the conditions that support and promote that growth” is needed (p. 689).

This article reports one aspect of contracted professional learning and research where a strategic approach to supporting teachers’ engagement in professional reading was co-constructed and examined. A team of seven teacher educators (“coaches”) worked one-on-one with a cohort of 21 teachers as part of a year-long teacher coaching programme situated within a coeducational independent school in Melbourne, Australia (pseudonym: Edgewater School). The authors were members of the coaching team, who engaged in formal and regular coach meetings over the course of the project. Here, we focus on findings related to two research questions:

  1. 1.

    What strategies did coaches use to support teachers’ engagement with professional readings?

  2. 2.

    How did these strategies influence coaches’ and teachers’ professional learning and practice?

Philosophical bearings

While we were experienced teacher educators, we were outsiders at Edgewater School and new to coaching. We were conscious of the fluid, socially constructed nature of our collective professional knowledge and recognised the potential for this knowledge base to be somewhat disconnected from Edgewater School’s priorities, practices and culture (Beckett, 2011). We were also mindful that achieving success would necessitate being accepted by the school community (a workplace that was new to us) and working with existing understandings and practices (Edwards, 2005). For these reasons, it made sense that we worked together, adopting a socio-cultural view of our own and teachers’ professional learning and practice.

Working together as a team of coaches

To support our work, we planned, prepared for and attended regular meetings where problems of practice could be recognised, examined and potentially solved. The intention was to reflectively contemplate the ‘effectiveness’ and ‘quality’ of our work in as generative and democratic format as possible (Arnold et al., 2013). Within this study, working together as a team of coaches provided crucial infrastructure and support to our work. Interactions between coaches and teachers provided a focus for the study of teaching and learning, and coach meetings provided a forum for reflecting on the coexistence of coaches and teachers, emerging coaching strategies, and evidence of their effectiveness. Studying our coaching practice helped us to achieve reflexive understandings of the university-school boundaries we were attempting to transcend, and the teachers whose professional learning we were seeking to support.

Reflecting the formal and informal nature of our interactions, there were four formal coach meetings, chaired by the lead coach (first author). The purpose of these meetings was to support the development of approaches to coaching, reflect on data recently collected, and shape the next steps in the project. The lead coach asked that each colleague attend these meetings ready to lend their professional knowledge, expertise and insights to the collective examination of emerging challenges. An agenda was set with such reflective questions as “What success stories would you like to recognise and celebrate?” and “What struggles are you confronting?” Within meetings, coaches took turns speaking, while others listened and reacted. The assumption was that these discursive practices would lead to more purposeful collective action that might yield the greatest impact on the learning of fellow coaches, practising teachers and their students. Sharing stories of success and struggle, and examining what coach actions seemed to best support teacher learning enabled us to harness the collective wisdom of the group in the pursuit of a productive repertoire of coaching strategies, and a rich and comprehensive professional learning experience for teachers. Beyond our formal meetings, coaches maintained informal communication with the lead coach and each other via phone, email and in person at the university. In and outside team meetings, coach observations and experiences were rigorously discussed with a view to understanding the dimensions of the coaching programme that were and were not meeting the needs of individual teachers. Coaches were trusted and empowered to adjust their interactions appropriately within teacher-coach relationships.

A socio-cultural view of teachers’ learning and practice

In the sections that follow, we draw on a socio-cultural perspective as we attempt to understand how coaches’ strategies influenced each other’s and teachers’ professional learning and practice. Over time, those interested in teacher education and professional learning have increasingly turned to socio-cultural perspectives of teacher learning stemming from the work of Vygotsky (1978). Vygotsky focussed on the important role of social processes in knowledge construction and on qualitative changes in values, beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, dispositions, aspirations and practices (Kozulin, 2015). From this perspective, Mitchell et al. (2010) argued that professional learning that is impactful consists of “both formal and structured programmes to support teachers’ learning in schools, as well as the more informal processes of teachers’ learning associated with thinking about and reflecting on aspects of their practice” (p. 536). Likewise, Timperley (2011) associated professional learning with “focussing on students, attending to requisite knowledge and skills, engaging in systematic inquiry into the effectiveness of practice, being explicit about underpinning theories of professionalism and engaging everyone in the system in learning” (p. 4). For Kelly (2006), teacher learning involves the development of situated teacher identities and “knowing-in-practice” (p. 515). Echoing these ideas, Edwards (2011) argued that professional learning “arises out of teachers’ engagement with the knowledge that takes forward their professional actions and identities” (p. 265). Further, a teacher’s commitment to engage in professional learning is influenced by their professional identities and mediated by their personal values and professional interests in the situated contexts in which they work (Day et al., 2006). Read together, these definitions capture that professional learning is complex, contextual and multifaceted. This too, was our reality in learning to coach at Edgewater School. Readings were an important and evidentiary tool for our work. Curated for their potential to drive more critical understandings of the complexities of teaching and learning, they provided a catalyst for associating, thinking and reflecting together. It was through these social and situated sense-making processes that coaches and teachers were able to take generic principles from readings and shape them into new and shared understandings of the possibilities for enhancing instructional activity at Edgewater School. This interpretive approach reflected what Schwab (1969) and later Carr and Kemmis (1986) described as practical deliberation “considering the alternative course of action possible in a situation and deciding which of these possible courses of action most fully expresses the purposes and commitments of the actor” (p. 93).

The research design

Participants

There were two groups of participants in this research project: coaches and teachers.

There were seven coaches who were brought together based on their disciplinary expertise. Together, they comprised an interdisciplinary team of teacher educators with expertise in curriculum and pedagogy across English, mathematics, science, humanities, languages and the arts with a common focus on pre-service and in-service teacher education. Each coach had held teaching and/or school leadership roles in primary and/or secondary school settings within the previous 10 years, including in international, interstate and remote contexts. As resources to each other, the coaches brought a rich tapestry of educational expertise to share and draw upon. For the purpose of reporting findings, the seven coaches have also been assigned pseudonyms: Coach Cecilia; Coach Diana; Coach Kassandra; Coach Katherine; Coach Marta; Coach Meg; and Coach Sally.

The teachers were qualified and practising teachers at Edgewater School, a coeducational independent school drawing an enrolment of approximately 1375 students from kindergarten to Year 12 with around 90% of students from higher socioeconomic groups. Twenty-five teachers across the early years, primary and secondary sections of Edgewater School completed a confidential online application to participate. The application to participate was used to match all 25 applicants to an academic coach aligning teachers’ interests with coaches’ expertise (see Ludecke et al., 2021). Twenty-one teachers completed the program.Footnote 1 Pseudonyms in the form of Teacher A, Teacher B, and so on have been assigned to the teachers we coached.

Action research

The school’s specifications, together with academic research on teacher professional learning (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996; Grimmett, 2014; Groundwater-Smith & Mockler, 2009; Owen, 2011) and professional coaching (Rhodes & Beneicke, 2002), contributed to the design of both the coaching programme and the research. The work of coaches and teachers was guided by action research methodology as a ‘disciplined’ way of making change (Kemmis et al., 2014): coaches researched their coaching practice, while teachers researched their teaching practice. In this way, coaches and teachers were engaged in cycles of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting in parallel and in interaction.

Interactions between coaches and teachers took the form of four prebrief—teach—reflect episodes over the course of the school year (January–December). The prebrief stage was to involve the coach and teacher participant setting the agenda for the subsequent lesson observation. The teach stage was to involve the coach observing a 60–90-min lesson. Subsequently, there would be a process of reflection. While this approach was stipulated by Edgewater School, it resembles the coaching cycle typically used in pre-service teacher education research studies (Stahl et al., 2018) and aligns well with action research methodology. The coaching programme and the learning experiences of teachers within it is discussed by Ludecke et al. (2021). Professional reading was identified as a crucial activity to expand the teachers’ capacity to make sense of challenges encountered in their everyday teaching as well as imagine alternative possibilities for solving these (Kemmis et al., 2014). Drawing on a socio-cultural perspective, readings were curated by coaches based on professional learning interests that teachers identified. These professional learning interests were negotiated and refined together with coaches.

Data collection and analysis

The study used mixed-methods. Data collection was ongoing over the course of the teacher coaching programme. There were two datasets: coach data and teacher data. This article presents an analysis of qualitative data collected via:

  • Transcribed audio recordings of four coach meetings;

  • Individual coach reflective journal entries following each prebrief—teach—reflect interaction;

  • Individual teacher reflective journal entries following each prebrief—teach—reflect interaction; and

  • A survey to evaluate the teachers’ satisfaction with the coaching programme.

The authors drew on Brooks’ (2015) approach to data analysis, where line-by-line coding is used to guide data analysis and identify emergent themes. Topics that had been central to the coaching meetings—coaching successes and coaching struggles—were used as a priori codes and framed the initial analysis of data. An inductive iterative process facilitated the identification of categories that reflected approaches taken by coaches to encourage teachers to engage with relevant research via suggested readings. These categories included: coaches’ actions; and teachers’ actions in response to coach actions. Next, we matched coach and teacher data to create 21 pairs. As coaches worked with between one and five teachers, coaches were represented in multiple pairs. These paired data were subject to the same process of analysis as we asked, “What strategies were most useful to coaches?” and “What was the impact of these on both coaches’ and teachers’ professional learning and practice?”. This article presents one theme identified as part of this process: “Strategies that encouraged reading”.

Findings

Co-construction of coaching strategies to encourage reading

In this section, we present an analysis of four coaching strategies to encourage reading: suggesting relevant readings and other professional resources; prompting annotations and reflections; inspiring connections between theory and practice; and championing experimentation. Throughout this analysis, we reflect on the important role of our meetings in shaping these emergent strategies over the course of the coaching programme.

Suggesting relevant readings and other professional resources

An early step towards engaging teachers was to provide them with what coaches perceived to be thought-provoking professional literature that reflected the school’s strategic priorities and professional learning interests that teachers had nominated (see Ludecke et al., 2021). A list of more than 50 readings was made available. These were organised under the following sub-headings: teacher professional identity; becoming an action researcher; assessment and feedback; inclusive education; differentiated teaching practice; questioning for critical and creative thinking; educational leadership; assessment; positive psychology; teacher stress and coping. Key scholars included Linda Alder, Stephen Dinham, Carol Dweck, Richard Paul, John Hattie, Stephen Kemmis, John Loughran, Carol Ann Tomlinson; and Dylan Wiliam. To overcome the problem of access (Broemmel et al., 2019; Carroll & Simmonds, 2009), a secure online repository was created and made available in line with University policies. Additionally, several books were purchased by the school to be kept in the teacher library (within the teachers’ lounge). While coaches assumed that these readings, together with other classroom-level data, would eventually shape classroom experimentation, this assumption was quickly challenged. The online repository of peer-reviewed articles was not accessed by the majority of the teachers and the books disappeared and were untraceable. We interpret this to mean that teachers had the best of intentions to read, and the idea of desk-copy books was at least more appealing than access to professional literature via an online platform requiring username and password.

At their first meeting, the coaches challenged their initial expectations of teachers and shared other resources that might be more appealing to time-poor teachers. Coach Kassandra explained her focus on exposing teachers to student-centred pedagogies, saying, “I can’t really push these sophisticated academic articles, so what I’m doing is using a lot of articles from the PEEL databaseFootnote 2”.

Likewise, Coach Diana referred to using TED Talks (https://www.ted.com/talks) by prominent researchers and educators, YouTube clips and quality education resource banks, explaining, “I’ve learnt that some [teachers] are happy to read the journal articles and others are not… Some like shorter things, they like video clips, going to browse around websites and different things like that”.

These contributions to discussion led other coaches to take a broader view of professional resources than written text. The influence on Coach Katherine’s thinking and practice is evident in this reflective journal entry:

Coach Katherine’s reflective journal

For me, this team has been an invaluable source of help and confirmation, as I discuss what has happened and possible ways to move forward, including suggested readings (and audios) that are short, relevant and will appeal to [teachers]

Coach Kassandra also noted that the sharing of ideas at coach meetings contributed to a more substantive collection of resources that could be selected with, for or by her teachers depending on their specific needs and motivations:

Coach Kassandra’s reflective journal

Coaches are always happy to share what they did and what resources they used with their participants. It was interesting to get new ideas and insights. For example, Cecilia shared a website (Cult of Pedagogy—https://www.cultofpedagogy.com/) with short articles on learning/teaching that she used with those who did not like reading research articles. I have since used it with my participants

As they became focussed on shared concerns, the coaches realised that getting the choice of resource right in terms of alignment with teachers’ needs, interests and preferences was crucial to the coaching relationship and, by extension, teacher learning. The coaching strategy became to complement suggested written texts with more contemporary resources that would meet a range of purposes. These included reputable websites, YouTube videos, podcasts, blogs, and resource banks.

Prompting annotations and reflections

The second strategy—prompting annotations and reflections—emerged as a way to help coaches identify the extent to which teachers were drawing meaning from the resources that had been suggested, while helping teachers to access academic texts in more nuanced ways. Coach Marta, for example, wanted the teachers she was coaching to demonstrate that they had completed readings in the following way, saying, “[When] I meet them, they give me three points from that article that they think could be useful in what they’re doing”.

Evidence of the impact of Marta’s strategy was noted in Teacher A’s reflective journal, where a search for three points was used to frame reading and reflection:

Teacher A’s reflective journal

I found it useful to collate the questions, comments and reflections from Marta and myself after the teaching observation, along with the suggested annotated readings and video clips into a folder so that I could clearly get my head around where I’m at and where I need to head next… My three key goals when I signed up for this coaching initiative were: wait time; differentiation; and questioning. With that in mind and through my interactions with Marta and the associated readings/videos/websites, I’ve found it useful to structure my insights into three concepts or strategies based on these three goals

Coaches Diana and Kassandra formalised their expectations by suggesting that teachers make and bring notes about what they were reading to their meetings together. The strategy to prompt annotations and reflections was not focussed on surveillance or compliance, but rather understanding the potential impact of resources on teacher thinking and practice. Through the experiences and stories they shared, it seemed that coaches wanted to establish what sense teachers were making of readings and pursue robust and critical discussions about how these insights might inform classroom experimentation. Evidence of the impact of this strategy appeared in Teacher B’s reflective journal:

Teacher B’s reflective journal

I have enjoyed my discussions with my coach and have reflected on what was discussed regularly. I realise I need to take more notes during [and] after our catch ups. So much is discussed and once I am back in my classroom, I find I don’t remember it all. I haven’t enjoyed the readings recommended so far but acknowledge that they are relevant to our discussions and appreciate the opportunity to read them

An issue raised in coach meetings was that some teachers struggled to identify implications for their teaching practice within suggested readings. Here, Coaches Cecilia, Sally and Katherine discuss some of the more challenging coaching relationships within the programme:

Coach Cecilia:

While he said that he had [done the readings], he wasn’t able to interact with me as though he had. So we didn’t have a shared language and point upon which to move forward

Coach Sally:

I think that’s one of the struggles that I’m having … they actually don’t know how to talk about the readings in relation to what we’re talking about

Coach Katherine:

Yeah, it’s brand new

These experiences and stories reveal the extent to which coaches relied on teachers to offer some narrative or critical interpretation in relation to suggested resources as part of shared and emergent meaning making endeavour. At times, this meant adjusting the nature of discussions about a reading or resource to suit the teachers’ needs or interests. Other times, this meant reconsidering the suitability of the reading, or making a plan to revisit it more critically at a later time. These experiences and stories highlight the importance of the coach and teacher working towards shared understandings, as well as ways to prompt annotations and reflections that take teachers forward in their reading, thinking and practice. What worked with one teacher-coach pair did not necessarily work with another. In addition, the interactions show the importance of the coaches working together to share stories and insights, and working together to problem-solve and create a broader repertoire of coaching strategies over time.

Inspiring connections between theory and practice

During our meetings, coaches shared experiences and stories about what they did to support teachers’ reading. Coach Marta raised the importance of honing in on practical implications, explaining, “I just give them a research article that I’ve really thought clearly about with practical and theory… Otherwise, I can’t get them. You’ve got to give them that scaffold”.

Coach Diana also acknowledged that there was limited value for teachers in wading through literature reviews and research methodology and discussed the ways she was scaffolding reading:

In our conversation it was that she didn’t like reading the articles - that she found it difficult to work her way through them. So I made suggestions like - read the abstract, the introduction, jump into the discussion and then go to the conclusion, rather than trying to read all of the method [section]. I then gave [the teachers] an article prompt sheet… [to record] just key points, your thoughts, a special quote that you liked.

Coach Meg reported highlighting and annotating the articles that she had suggested to teachers as a way to indicate exactly where each article spoke to relevant issues to explore together, saying, “I got an article and I highlighted it and I wrote in big, red text, “This is where we are at!”.

Coach Kassandra was inspired, and in the subsequent coach meeting reported that she had adopted this approach:

I said, “Look, these are the articles I want you to read before our next interaction, and you just need to focus on two things: (1) how teachers act in the classroom and (2) possible strategies”… Every time she reads a new article, she takes notes on both categories. These two particular points are really helping her to focus her reading.

Evidence of the impact of this strategy appeared in Teacher C’s reflective journal:

Teacher C’s reflective journal

[Kassandra] has … given me appropriate readings. This has allowed me to evaluate my interactions with my many EAL [English as an additional language] students and adopt a few new strategies

Like the excerpts of Teachers A and B presented earlier, these excerpts show that coaches contributed different tools to the pool of ideas, thus sharing in the development of new resources. Specific approaches to scaffolding practical insights varied across and between coaching relationships, but shared in common a focus on helping teachers to understand the anatomy of research articles, locate relevant passages, and reflect on key questions that warranted critical analysis. This strategy not only reduced the time and cognitive demands associated with reading, but made the task more purposeful, with immediate and positive implications for teachers’ learning.

For example, Coach Diana reported having created a template and that this tool was well received by “four out of the six” teachers that she coached, while Coach Kassandra reported that the teacher who followed her suggestions had become “really engaged” in professional reading.

Championing experimentation

The fourth reading-related coaching strategy was to champion experimentation with new teaching strategies, the ideas for which had been located via readings. Coaches noted that for some teachers, taking research insights into their classrooms was a somewhat logical step: they took a risk and enthusiastically experimented. Below, Coaches Diana and Marta shared the following stories that provide evidence for this finding:

Coach Diana:

I had one [teacher] that liked the two articles that I’d sent her. She’d actually gone through and picked out some things and had already tried them in the classroom [by our next interaction]

Coach Marta:

They are so willing to try anything, and every time I offer something, only one thing and some reading, they breathe it in, and the next minute I know they’re applying it

However, other teachers worried that the school culture would preclude them from being successful and needed to be supported in becoming critical and taking research-informed risks. For instance, as documented in her reflective journal, Coach Kassandra explicitly encouraged Teacher E to consider an approach presented in one of the readings she had suggested. This resulted in a somewhat critical and creative response:

Coach Kassandra’s reflective journal

One of the readings I sent [Teacher E] was Moving on Map. I suggested using this idea as a starting point or even trying it as it was described in the article, as Teacher E did not seem to be excited about doing a lot of work. Next time we met, he was quite critical about the map. For him, it was spoon-feeding students which contradicted his interest in self-regulated learning. But this article and a few other readings encouraged him to design his own strategy for self-regulated learning. He hoped to encourage students to think and articulate the problem, use three steps to solve the problem and document the solution

Clearly, the choice of reading and his coach’s encouragement led Teacher E to take the initiative to design and test his own strategy to help students to develop self-regulation.

The same approach was subsequently taken by Cecilia in coaching Teacher F:

Teacher F’s reflective journal

I have become aware of how much work I do in the classroom. I find that I am tired at the end of the day, but given how much energy goes into driving the class, it makes sense. I need to move to thinking about getting students to do more by making them think hard … Cecilia’s suggestion to reread section 2 in “What expert teachers do” (Loughran, 2010) helped remind me of the range of activities that can be used in the classroom… The book will help to direct these activities. Additionally, Cecilia has recommended trying an activity that gets students to work together in groups

While this reflection shows that the reading suggested by Coach Cecilia encouraged Teacher F to reflect critically on and rethink her teaching, she also noted that Coach Cecilia “recommended trying an activity” signalling recognition of the coaching strategy to encourage experimentation. This was also noted by Cecilia in her reflective journal:

Cecilia’s reflective journal

I noticed that one group collaborated more effectively than others—and this is why they generated a more sophisticated response to the task posed. I wondered how Teacher F might work to showcase not only successful responses, but the thinking processes that led to successful responses. So I suggested to Teacher F that our next interaction might involve experimenting with jigsaw and/or fishbowl activities and provided links to quick video explainers produced by Cult of Pedagogy. For these activities to be effective, Teacher F will need to apply what she has learned by revisiting “What expert teachers do” and use the Socratic questioning techniques I have been suggesting

Teacher F felt “redundant” today because she is no longer doing all the talking. In this lesson, I saw more evidence of student thinking and learning than ever before! While the students were resistant to what we were doing and their struggle was uncomfortable to watch, the interactions and conversations between them were really great! We have disrupted and redefined the roles Teacher F and her students play each lesson. Today we put students under pressure and looked for evidence of thinking and learning that might guide Teacher F in subsequent planning

Evident in this statement is the impact of reading about Socratic Questioning (e.g. Paul & Elder, 2007) on Teacher F’s professional learning and practice.

Coaches wanted teachers to see a reason to read, to read critically, to feel safe to strengthen their pedagogical stance, and to take qualified risks towards improving the conditions for student learning. This meant that they often had to be explicit in championing sustained experimentation with research-informed teaching strategies. Coaches encouraged teachers to be prepared that they might not see immediate enthusiasm from their students in response to efforts to change their teaching practice.

Teachers translating research insights into practice

While the teachers’ professional learning experiences and trajectories varied, the data presented below suggests that these four strategies to encourage reading were well received by the participating teachers and inspired critical connections between research and practice.

Like Teacher F, teachers were typically responsive to their coaches’ encouragement to translate research insights into teaching practice. Lesson ideas were popular, probably because they produced immediate rewards for teachers in terms of student engagement and enjoyment. Experimenting with more sophisticated pedagogies, like questioning techniques and collaborative problem-solving processes, sometimes produced student resistance and so required resolve and persistence. Echoing many other teachers’ experiences, Teacher C named a range of teaching strategies she had located in the readings and other professional resources suggested by Coach Kassandra, specifically, “some quick formative assessment techniques such as voting, probing student questioning, post-it notes, think-pair-share, exit slips”. Teacher C’s data suggest that it was through her coach’s efforts to inspire connections between theory and practice that she located and adopted several new formative assessment techniques. Professional reading expanded Teacher C’s range of pedagogies for monitoring student learning, an outcome that piqued the interest of the school leadership team, for whom formative assessment was a strategic priority.

Many teachers found that reading-focussed conversations with their coaches helped them not only to make sense of challenges, but draw strength from being research-informed. Teacher D’s reflective journal exemplifies this:

Teacher D’s reflective journal

Through the coaching I have been able to crystallise my teaching philosophy around reading… Through working with my coach and her questioning we have managed to get to the bottom of my thinking. I am now able to make strong and clear decisions about learning and strategies I will and won’t include into my lessons based on my philosophy. I will be able to support these decisions with theory and key understandings about what works best in my classroom

Teacher D’s reflections suggest that professional reading honed her capacity to interpret and act upon her world with greater confidence.

While the teachers’ reflections speak to the intersection between coach and teacher knowledge and action, we note that efforts to bring research insights to life in the classroom were sometimes frustrated by aspects of the structuring environment, particularly the school culture. The personalised nature of the coaching programme meant that while all teachers made progress, not all experienced all four strategies. For example, Teacher G, who established a goal to include one challenging, collaborative problem-solving activity each week, commented in one reflective journal entry, “Many students have been ‘trained’ to expect me to teach maths a particular way and are showing resistance to these activities”. For Teacher G, professional reading not only provided a rationale for taking risks in her teaching, it also generated confidence to persist with encouraging students to adopt new ways of participating in mathematics learning. Teacher G not only learned to do things differently, she became informed, assured and critically reflective. In these ways, she became a different teacher.

Discussion

This article reports one aspect of a professional learning and research consultancy where regular meetings provided a forum for coaches to collectively co-construct a range of strategies that might lead teachers to rethink their professional beliefs, gain deeper theoretical knowledge, and shift their teaching practice. Coaches learned from and with each other by sharing stories of success and struggle. Encouraging engagement with quality professional literature is one example of a shared problem that coaches confronted in their work with teachers and supported each other to address. This article has presented an analysis of coaches’ interactions with each other during coach meetings and with teachers during prebrief—teach—reflect episodes, documenting for others how we grew in our ability to engage teachers in professional reading. Identifying these specific strategies makes an important contribution to the existing literature.

With respect to the research questions, the qualitative accounts demonstrate the socio-cultural nature of professional learning for both coaches and teachers in the project. The interactions among coaches illustrate the ways and means by which coaches supported each other led to improved ways and means of supporting teachers, with a particular emphasis on translating research insights from professional reading into teaching practice. The outcome was a set of four emergent and interconnected strategies to encourage reading (Table 1). The study found that these strategies were effective for the majority of teachers participating in this research. Most teachers grew in their motivation and capacity to engage with readings as they noticed the positive influence of these on their professional knowledge and practice. We argue that this knowledge is important for enhancing the professional learning of practicing teachers, particularly since establishing reading as a professional practice is a cost-effective way for schools and teachers to achieve ongoing learning and growth.

Table 1 Strategies to encourage reading, including examples
Full size table

While the four strategies seem to describe a complete list or trajectory, the reality is that the experiences of coaches and teachers in this project were neither linear nor lock-step. Within teacher-coach relationships, movements were made back and forth, with strategies being revisited and reviewed. Reflecting the social and situated nature of the professional learning, coaches learned alongside teachers and became increasingly adept at guiding teachers to decide the direction that the coaching relationship would take and the terms upon which teaching and learning would be enacted at Edgewater School. This process was messy, uncomfortable and took time (Ludecke et al., 2021).

The experiences of coaches and teachers in this study are consistent with the findings of previous research. For example, teachers reported being time-poor and their reading activity was initially low and sporadic (Broemmel et al., 2019; Kitchen et al., 2015). Some teachers resisted or even refused professional reading regardless of their coaches’ encouragement and scaffolding, with personal and work-related distractions being frequently cited as making it difficult to prioritise reading and reflection. Also consistent with previous research is that it was difficult for teachers to unpack the technical language associated with academic publications and identify immediate value to the classroom (Broemmel et al., 2019; Carroll & Simmonds, 2009; Kitchen et al., 2015).

While previous research has consistently argued that teachers’ engagement with professional literature can be lacking (Broemmel et al., 2019; Kitchen et al., 2015), the findings of this study show that this issue can be addressed. However, it is not realistic to set readings for teachers and hope to observe changes in pedagogy and practice. Rather, we found that teachers needed access to purposefully curated resources that were appropriately scaffolded, collaboratively unpacked and carefully ‘translated’ for practice. We argue that inspiring connections between educational research and practice and using these connections to drive classroom experimentation was pivotal. Bringing ideas to life in the classroom tended to affirm that professional reading can be worthwhile. This, in turn, motivated teachers to continue reading. However, as we have evidenced, teachers needed clear, personalised and explicit encouragement and support (e.g. structured advice about note-taking, guided reflective questions, etc.). That coaches were able to influence and support teachers to read and experiment is testament to the effectiveness of coach meetings in supporting and extending them as teacher educators.

Conclusion

At the outset of the project, we were keen to support within-classroom change—this is what we were contracted to instigate and evaluate. While we were initially ambitious that meaningful, powerful and transformative teacher professional learning and growth would take place, over the course of the year, we too shifted in our thinking and practice as we came to see and value the co-constructed, emergent aspects of our work with each other and with teachers. This shift is best described as a consolidation of our pedagogy of teacher education (Loughran, 2006) around creating a reason to read. Reflecting as action researchers, we believe that we developed our own criticality as much as we shaped the criticality of the teachers we were coaching.

We argue for a valuable contribution to the existing literature given the absence of actionable frameworks for the meaningful and ongoing integration of professional reading in teachers’ work (Kitchen et al., 2015). While the findings suggest the usefulness of the coaching strategies to teacher educators, subject teaching associations, and of course, school leadership and teachers, it is also clear that each step was complex and ultimately relied on the incisiveness and skill of individual coaches. This incisiveness and skill developed over the course of the project. In this way, the project made a lasting impact on our thinking and practice as teacher educators.

The findings have important implications for professional learning courses, programmes and initiatives. While professional reading is a cost-effective professional learning activity, it takes time—a resource that teachers crave. If schools, mentors, coaches and subject teaching associations want to meaningfully engage teachers in professional reading, they need to think strategically about the social and situated nature of professional learning—including reading-related practices such as thinking, conversation and experimentation—that might enhance the critical use and application of professional literature. It is useful to have access to a more knowledgeable other to guide teachers’ reading more carefully and the model developed through this study contributes a purposeful approach. Further research is required to explore the potential of the sustained use of these strategies in other settings (e.g. professional learning courses, mentoring programs), where action research drives coach and teacher interactions and a culture of studying and enhancing practice.