Differentiated Coaching for Reading and Literacy in Schools

Introduction to Differentiated Coaching

One approach to professional development that is gaining widespread acceptance among reading leaders is differentiated coaching. This paper examines how reading leaders can better engage in differentiated coaching for teachers of reading to meet the learning and culturally diverse needs of reading students in an elementary school. Specifically, it addresses the existing degree of comfort with this tool, the readiness of the school's culture to implement it, and a recommended approach for carving out time to use differentiated coaching. Finally, a discussion concerning what type of data might be collected while using differentiated coaching concludes the paper.

Degree of Comfort with Differentiated Coaching

Although my school has used peer mentoring in the past, there has been no effort to employ the differentiated coaching model, so the degree of comfort is currently suboptimal. According to Yendol-Hoppey and Dana (2010), the three models for differentiated coaching are peer coaching, culturally responsive coaching, and content-focused coaching. From a personal perspective, I have less experience with the types of activities that could be regarded as peer coaching and content-focused coaching, but I have significant experience and expertise in coaching other teachers in cross-cultural competencies — a strength particularly well suited to the culturally responsive coaching model. In addition, because of the diverse student body in this school district, the majority of reading teachers are already culturally responsive out of necessity.

Notwithstanding this lack of overall experience with differentiated coaching, most of the teachers at my school possess the acumen, inquisitiveness, and recognition that it is important to avoid assumptions about other teachers — qualities that are required for applying these models in real-world classrooms. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that with some in-service training and practice, all of the reading teachers at my school could employ these models depending on their goals and individual circumstances, in ways that would help develop a degree of comfort with this strategy. It will be important, however, for all participating teachers to accept some level of risk in becoming transparent about their teaching abilities, thereby opening themselves up to critique by their peers. In this regard, Yendol-Hoppey and Dana (2010) emphasize that "each member of the coaching dyad must demonstrate a willingness to take calculated risks with their teaching as they move out of isolation to make their professional work public" (p. 114).

Because differentiated coaching remains untested in our school, it is unclear whether the strategy will receive support from the school's administration, especially given the amount of time required on the part of two teachers to achieve one coaching outcome. It will therefore be important for sponsoring teachers to present a solid case in support of the differentiated coaching model and its potential for improving academic outcomes in order to garner administrative approval and ongoing support (Hall & Simera, 2008). According to Robbins (2015), however, there is a growing body of evidence concerning the efficacy of differentiated coaching in helping teachers become better reading instructors, and this evidence can help bolster the argument for its implementation. Robbins advises that "the intended outcome of the formal coaching process [is] high-quality teaching that generates improved student learning" (2015, p. 52). It will also be important to emphasize that both the coach and the invited teacher can benefit from the collaboration that is the hallmark of differentiated coaching (Robbins, 2015).