At the same time, coaches are on a different hierarchical level than teachers. Coaches have access to different trainings and materials, as well as people- district administrators and principals. So coaches have a different bundle of social capital than teachers do. Coaches can use their position and social capital to persuade teachers to change their instructional practices.
- Does a coach persuade teachers so teachers learn about policy and instruction? Or does a coach support teacher learning to catalyze the persuasion of teachers to shift their practices?If persuasion occurs, then it seems likely that learning is happening, too--but what kind of learning?
- What does the coach need expertise on so they're effective at persuading and developing teachers? Can a coach serve as an outstanding teacher of teachers without being effective at persuading teachers to change? What about the reverse- how much teacher learning can occur if the coach is not persuasive?
No comments:
Post a Comment