A major development in coaching has been making an impact in North America, and it’s heading to the UK and the rest of Europe. Doug Strycharczyk reveals why evidence-based instructional coaching, designed to help the client implement proven practices, is such a valuable proposition
To coaching purists, instructional coaching (IC) may seem a contradiction in terms, but it has a wide evidence base and proponents argue it offers a new and valuable perspective.Created by Dr Jim Knight at the University of Kansas, IC was developed initially for the world of education, but has applications in other areas too – the occupational, social and health worlds, as well as in personal development.
Like ‘normal’ coaching, IC is a partnership between coach and client, which seeks to help the client solve problems and achieve goals. It focuses on seven ‘partnership principles’:
- Equality (between coach and client)
- Choice (for the client about how and what they learn)
- Dialogue
- Praxis (encouraging the client to apply their learning to real life)
- Voice (helping the client find their voice)
- Reflection (encouraging the client to be reflective)
- Reciprocity (the coach should expect to get as much as they give).
These principles and the skills of listening, encouraging reflection, dialogical questioning and effective communication, underpin the approach. So far, this would satisfy any coaching purist.
However, IC differs in that it is designed to help the client implement proven practices that are usually validated by research. Thus, it is an evidence-based approach and an instructional coach is both expert and partner.
Knight says: “I have been thinking about how coaching can be represented as coming at professional growth from different perspectives. Any one perspective is no more important than another, but the different perspectives do serve different purposes.”
Back to school
Knight’s interest was born from his own experiences as a teacher working with college students at risk of failure in Toronto, Canada. He worked with a coach, Dee LaFrance, who helped him improve his teaching using scientifically proven teaching practices. Over the past 20 years, Knight and colleagues at the University of Kansas have fine-tuned the approach – which has been called ‘learning consulting’ and ‘instructional collaborating’ – before arriving at IC.
But isn’t an instructional coach a fancy name for a mentor or even a trainer using a coaching style? Certainly there is common ground with mentoring as we’ve seen, particularly with certain types of developmental mentoring where there is a partnership between equals and not a master/apprentice or expert/novice relationship.
Jadi Miller, principal of Elliott Elementary School in Lincoln, Nevada, says her school’s three instructional coaches are indeed peers and partners of the teachers who help introduce new ideas and partner with them in the classroom.
“Some people originally viewed the coaches as additional administrators. I wanted to make sure teachers wouldn’t have any reason not to go to a coach. They don’t have any performance review or supervisory duties. I feel like we make progress on our new ideas and implementation so much faster because of the coaches. They give them that ongoing feedback and support, and help plan and contribute so much.”
The key difference is that the instructional coach also teaches others how to learn very specific, evidence-based, proven techniques.
And there is a place for this. Attempts to move away from ineffective forms of traditional ‘training’ have perhaps seen many throw the baby out with the bath water, relying on the client to have all the answers and never sharing any ideas or practices.
IC applies effective relational principles of coaching while recognising that there are some tried and tested methods, processes and techniques that will support people to perform better.
Best practice
The instructional coach may role-model best practice by, for example, teaching a class. The coach can support the client as they develop and implement the solution.
Knight says: “Some coaching approaches place emphasis on dialogue that surfaces assumptions because the belief is that people need to change their assumptions to change their actions. Other approaches work from the belief that people usually change their assumptions when they change their actions, and therefore the focus of coaching should be on empowering people to implement and learn from new practices. IC focuses more on the experience-first side.
“I think the skills a coach needs are different depending on which approach a coach takes. An instructional coach would need to know a lot about evidence-based practices and be able to explain those practices precisely, model them, observe others and skilfully provide feedback.”
Knowing, explaining and modelling practices would not be that important for a reflective peer coach, however.
“A peer coach would need to be skilled at empowering a client to set goals, and also be skilled at acting in ways that communicate that they see themselves as an equal. Expert coaches, however, would not be likely to position themselves as equals, and they would be much less concerned with individual goal setting.
“In my work with IC, I spend a lot of time helping others master precise explanations, modelling, observation and conversation around the observations.”
Obviously the evidence-based practices will vary according to the context in which the coaches are operating.
“In schools, this refers to implementing effective teaching practices. In the business world, instructional coaches might be providing support for customer service practices, leadership skills, or any other professional practice that business leaders might want to see implemented in their organisation. It will have its applications in the sports, health and social worlds too.”
Research results
Knight’s research shows (through a rigorous, random sample study) that IC led to significantly more – and better – quality implementation. In the US, schools that have implemented IC have seen a marked improvement in student performance. Evaluations by Knight and project staff have found nearly across-the-board improvement in participating schools. Even though the rate of success varies by school, test scores have improved dramatically in many locations.
“It would be nice to say ‘with coaching, the scores will improve by 20 per cent’. What I can say, is that coaching leads to improved instruction,” Knight says.
Ken Geisick, superintendent of Riverbank Unified School District, California, says his district has seen a marked improvement in student achievement, both in test scores and generally. One of about 25 school districts using IC in California, the district’s scores have gone up, and teachers have improved their craft as well.
“We had the largest growth in terms of test scores of any district in our county,” Geisick says, after implementing IC. “Year-by-year improvement in achievement is not easy. IC has been the absolute best return on our investment in professional development.”
Dr Christian van Nieuwerburgh, programme leader, Coaching Psychology Programmes, University of East London (UEL), UK, says: “IC presents us with an evidence-based, researched and effectively evaluated coaching model. Importantly, it has bridged the gap between the many ‘non-directive’ approaches often favoured in schools and the needs for effective professional development in schools and elsewhere.”
Potential contribution
Recognising its potential contribution to coaching, IC has now been integrated into the “Coaching and Mentoring in Education” module in the MSc in Coaching Psychology at UEL. Over this year, a number of pilot projects will be rolled out in schools and colleges in England.
Knight spoke at the Institute of Leadership & Management coaching conferences in 2010 and 2011, and is due to visit in April. Gaynor Lewis, operations director, ILM says: “Quietly spoken yet charismatic,
Jim put his ideas about IC over thoughtfully and carefully and with a complete absence of jargon. I don’t think there is a coach in the country who would walk away from Jim Knight and not have enhanced their understanding of their discipline.” n
- Doug Strycharczyk is managing director of AQR
- Jim Knight is a research associate at the University of Kansas, Center for Research on Learning, and president of the Instructional Coaching Group. He is visiting the UK in April this year to speak at a number of conferences run by the ILM and AQR.
- For further information email Monika Czwerenko: monika@aqr.co.uk