Join the conversation

...about what is working in our public schools.

Tough Luck

vonzastrowc's picture
By Claus von Zastrow on May 14, 2010

Hallelujah! A recent study shows that an improvement strategy may actually work at scale. And it may even work well. What a relief after a spate of studies suggesting that nothing ever really works for anyone anywhere. But control your enthusiasm. Even this promising strategy has fallen under the budget axe.

According to Deb Viadero in EdWeek, a Stanford study "suggests that putting literacy coaches in schools can help boost students' reading skills by as much as 32 percent over three years." (The program focuses on K-2 classrooms.) And the more coaching, the better:

Teachers and schools that experienced more coaching sessions tended to spur bigger learning gains in their students. Some teachers recieved no coaching over the course of the study, while others had as many as 43 sessions.

The program seemed to work best in schools where teachers have real authority and strong relationships with their peers:

The schools where the most coaching took place were...places where teachers felt they had a voice in what went on in their building and where professional networks among teachers were already strong. (Those network connections also grew over the course of the study, one of the papers found).

But this apparent success doesn't come cheap, which does not bode well for the program.

Despite the findings of positive results from the Literacy Collaborative, half the schools in the study have since withdrawn from the program. [Researcher Anthony] Bryk said the program's expense was a factor in these decisions.

I wonder if the other half can hold on.

Link to this story: http://www.learningfirst.org/tough-luck

3 Comments Digg this article Del.icio.us

Hmmm...check the reading

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 05/15/2010 - 05:07

Hmmm...check the reading scores of Nashville-Davidson County where literacy coaches have been in place for years. Initially there were gains but last year there was a significant drop. The schools don't need literacy coaches -- what a waste of money. They need teachers that can teach reading. So...teachers do your job and teach reading! Please

»

Anonymous, I find your

Submitted by vonzastrowc on Sat, 05/15/2010 - 06:57

Anonymous, I find your reasoning a bit curious. In response to a study that demonstrates significant and sustained gains for a specific program across the country, you cite the experience of one district using what is perhaps an entirely different program and draw the conclusion that all coaching is a "waste of money." You then make the assumption that reading scores are dropping because teachers aren't "doing their job."

Was the coaching program in your county the same as the one described in the study? Was it well implemented? How sustained were the initial gains? How large? Could the significant drop have been for reasons that have nothing to do with the coaching strategy? Does a single year's drop mean it has failed?

And is it conceivable that professionals--even great professionals--can do their jobs better when the get staff development and training? That's what happens in so many other professions.

There are all kinds of reasons to stay cautious about or even skeptical of the Stanford study. Do gains persist after second grade, when background knowledge becomes more important? How much confidence do we have in the assessment results? Etc. But it doesn't strike me as productive to make grand pronouncements about the worthiness of any intervention strategy because it failed in one setting for who knows what reason.

»

(a different Anonymous) -- in

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 05/15/2010 - 13:42

(a different Anonymous) -- in my experience, literacy coaching can mean a lot of things. In some ways, it's an extension of the Reading Specialist role, which is firmly embedded in many school districts (and can also mean a variety of things). Claus, your point that having literacy coaches is analagous to professional development is a good one. On the other hand, I hope we can agree that the need for literacy coaching points to the weakness of our teachers' preparation in teaching reading. With absolutely no disagreement on the goal of having all children read well by 3rd grade, ed schools should have solved this one a long time ago.

»

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options