Tia Reynolds

Itec 7460
Coaching Journal
Session 1 & 2
Ms. Holland is currently a 3rd grade teacher at Peyton Forest Elementary
school. This school year is her 5th year of teaching and her first year teaching an
inclusion class. Throughout the last five years, Ms. Holland and I have been able to
establish a friendship outside of work where we are able to discuss work related
issues and goals comfortably. Over time, I have noticed that Ms. Holland continues
to seek new ways to improve her classroom instruction. Although in the past she
has been very flexible and open to implementing new ideas, teaching an inclusion
class has become overwhelming this school year, hindering her from truly exploring
new ideas as she has done in the past. As a 4 th grade inclusion teacher, I share
some of her same challenges. Being that Ms. Holland has the desire to learn new
instructional practices, I thought she would be an excellent teacher to coach.
During our first session, Ms. Holland and I were able to cover a lot of
information and establish norms and goals going forward. The following information
was discussed during our first session:

Purpose
Explanation of Partnership Approach Strategy
Explanation of Teacher Meeting Log
Dates & Time durations of sessions
Teacher & Coach Goals for upcoming Session
Understanding my Audience Questioning

During the session I explained to Ms. Holland that the purpose of this
particular coaching

journey was to improve her instructional practice by implementing more technology.

I also explained to her that we would be partners in this process. Partnership at its
core, is a deep belief that we are no more important than those with whom we work,
and that we should do everything we can to respect that equality. This approach is
built around the core principles of equality, choice, voice, dialogue, reflection,
praxis, and reciprocity (Knight, page 24). Ms. Holland appreciated that we would be
working together to achieve the goal of implementing more technology into her
classroom and thus the partnership made it easier for us to discuss remaining
information. I explained the components of the teacher meeting log and how the
form is a simple way to hold ourselves accountable for upcoming sessions. We
decided that we would do five sessions total including the first one, with 3 of the
sessions serving as our main sessions that we would notate on our meeting log.
Those sessions would be 1 hour and 30 minutes long. In addition, we decided to
have two mini-sessions in between our main sessions to discuss any other issues
that may have come up. Since we were both clear that our main sessions would
require modeling and observation, we decided not to set specific days of the week
for our sessions but to remain flexible.
Ms. Holland stated that it has been seemingly easier for her to implement
technology into her math block, but more challenging to implement technology into
her literature block on a consistent basis. From this revelation, we were able to
establish our teaching and coach goals for our next session, which would be a minisession. Our goals for the next session are as follows:

Coach Goal- compose a list of ideas/resources for implementing

technology into literacy
Teacher Goal- Decide which standard/objective/skills would be
addressed in this process

During our first session, I saw our pre-existing relationship to be a potential

challenge. I did not want to assume that because Ms. Holland and I already had a
personal relationship that I knew everything about her professional goals or
concerns. To combat this challenge, I asked Ms. Holland four questions in order to
understand her better. ICs communicate better with their teachers if they first ask
a few questions. An IC might start working with a teacher by asking these questions
in an actual learning conversation, or an IC might consider these questions on her
own as she prepares for a future conversation with teachers (Knight, page 66). The
following are the questions that were asked along with Ms. Hollands corresponding
answers:

What are your most pressing concerns about integrating technology

more into your instruction?
My most pressing concerns are timing. I dont always have a lot of
time to plan elaborate lessons that infuse technology.
What do you already know about technology integration?
I know that it is important. I know about several tools that I use daily
for math. I know that technology really engages kids.
What are your learning preferences?
I learn best by seeing things modeled first
What are your values in relation to this topic?
I think that technology is very important, however I have a lot of
struggling readers. Many of them still need to learn the basicsfoundational understanding. Im all for integrating technology into
reading but I still value the traditional way of teaching children how to
read.

Having the information to these questions really helped me to frame our

mini-session. I wanted to make sure I presented ideas to Ms. Holland that allowed
her to see how technology can be easily integrated into her reading block and
enable her to still utilize some of her traditional approaches to teaching students
how to read and write.
Upon our second mini session, I noticed that Ms. Holland was more
comfortable with the process. Although Ms. Holland and I already know each other

very well, she was still skeptical at first about receiving coaching on implementing
more technology. I think that her comfortability stems from using the partnership
approach. Instead of me telling simply telling her what to do, we instead worked
very well as partners from the very start and I was also very clear about the
purpose.
During our second mini session, I provided Ms. Holland a list of ideas that
could be used to implement technology into literacy. One of the ideas I presented to
her was the use of web quest. A WebQuest is an inquiry-oriented online tool for
learning says workshop expert Bernie Dodge . This means it is a classroom-based
lesson in which most or all of the information that students explore and evaluate
comes from the World Wide Web. She loved the idea. During this time she also
decided that she wanted to focus on grammar and writing since she usually has a
hard time teaching both skills thoroughly. I explained to Ms. Holland that during the
next main session, I would model a lesson for her on her students. The lesson would
involve using a web quest within the classroom. One thing that I have found to be a
challenge when people have modeled lessons for me is the loss of focus during the
modeled. One solution to combat this issue was using an observation form. It was
important for us to establish some teaching practices to look for during the modeled
lesson. By co-constructing the form with teachers prior to the model lesson, ICs
can check for teachers understanding of critical teaching behaviors. Later by
having teachers fill out the form, they can focus the teachers attention on what
matters most in the model lesson (Knight, page 112). We established the following
five teaching practices to look for in the modeled lesson:

Thorough review of content so that they are clear of background

knowledge
Explain the expectation for the lesson and check for understanding

Explain the purpose of webquest and the webquest they would be

using
Model & thoroughly explain procedures while working on webquest
Circulate the room to ensure students are on task & continue to check
for understanding
Demonstrate classroom management by progress monitoring &
working with students one-on-one while other students are engaging in
the webquest

All of these teaching practices were important to Ms. Holland because they
addressed many of the concerns that she had in regards to implementing more
technology into her literacy block. After this mini-session, we were ready for the
modeled lesson.
Session 3 & 4
We decided that session 3 would consist of me modeling a one hour lesson
and then we would debrief for 30-45 minutes. By going into the classroom and
showing teachers how to implement an intervention, ICs help teachers obtain a
deeper understanding of the intervention in the context where it matters most: their
classroom (Knight, page 29). Before modeling the lesson, I researched several
grammar and writing webquest. I created a lesson plan for the modeled lesson I
wanted to do and I reviewed the list of teaching practices Ms. Holland and I created.
The lesson went very well and Ms. Holland was able to make notes and see
technology used in a literacy lesson. The webquest I used with the students allowed
students to practice grammar and writing skills. The webquest included engaging
activities and tutorial videos. The webquest was detailed and students were easily
able to follow along. I unfortunately wasnt able to demonstrate maintaining a
guided group during this time as much as I would have liked. Using modeling as a
strategy allowed Ms. Holland to see how a technology tool can be consistently used
in literacy and still enable the teacher to effectively manage the classroom.

Ms. Holland and I spent time debriefing after the modeled lesson was
complete. She shared with me the notes she took on our shared observation form.
According to her form, we both agreed that maintaining a guided group during this
time wasnt adequately modeled. However she was pleased with everything else
that she saw modeled. One challenge of actually pulling one of her guided groups
was my failure to plan for a guided group. This was definitely a lesson learned for
me. We decided that our next mini-lesson would focus on us preparing for her
lesson in which I would observe her. For her observed lesson, we would use the
same observation form that we created for the lesson I modeled. We established the
following goals:

Coaching goals- since I failed to adequately demonstrate how to

maintain a guided group during this time, compile tips on how to
manage centers and guided groups.
Teacher goals- create a lesson plan that includes a webquest

For our next mini-lesson, Ms. Holland came very prepared with a thorough
lesson plan and a webquest similar to the one I modeled for her. I shared with her
some tips on managing centers and guided groups, some of which she notated and
altered her lesson plan to include. During this planning session it was clear that Ms.
Holland was confident in a new skill- incorporating more technology into her literacy
block in the form of webquest.
Session 5
During this session, Ms. Holland and I agreed we would focus on her teaching
a lesson using a webquest. I observed her for one hour and we debriefed for 30
minutes. Observation is an excellent strategy for everyone involved to learn and
progress. Observing and providing feedback are other important ways in which ICs
enable teachers to teach interventions with a high degree of fidelity to the researchvalidated practices (Knight, page 29). Ms. Holland did an excellent job in her

lesson. She was comfortable and eager to introduce her students to another
webquest. I was able to notate many positive things in her lesson. She utilized all of
the information we discussed in each of our sessions.
Upon debriefing with Ms. Holland, I was able to share some helpful feedback
with her. One thing that I notated on her observation form was to consider how to
differentiate the webquest for students. Most webquest can be enriched or modified
to fit student needs. One affective change that I noticed with Ms. Holland is that she
is now interested in creating her own literacy webquest. This shows me that
throughout this process she has become more comfortable and confident in her
ability to use technology into her lessons.
I learned a lot about coaching throughout this process. One challenge that I
faced at the end of our last session was lack of reflections. Although I journaled
about each session, I did not utilize the After-Action report until the very last
process. I think that I would have benefited more each session if I had filled out the
report each time. An AAR is a professional discussion of an event, focused on
performance standards, that allow participants to discover for themselves what
happened, why it happened, and how to sustain strengths and improve on
weaknesses (Knight, page 131).
After completing the After Action Report, I was able to reflect upon the
coaching process as a whole. I know going forward, I really need to make sure that
all of the teachers needs are addressed in the modeled lesson. I neglected to truly
model how a guided group could be implemented during the modeled lesson. In
reflecting, I am glad that we chose to focus only using one technology tool. This
allowed me to truly focus on the art of coaching without being overwhelmed with

having to coach Ms. Holland on several tools. I also think that having mini-coaching
sessions in between our major coaching sessions helped to keep us both on track.

Reference

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional Coaching: A Partnership Approach for Improving Instruction. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/webquests/