Elena Aguilar, author of The Art of Coaching, is an educational consultant who practices and trains educators in what she calls “transformational coaching”, which focuses on an educator’s “behaviours, beliefs and ways of being”. In a recent article on Educational Leadership, she invited schools working with any coaching programme to ensure they have a strong structure by articulating a response to 10 key elements.
Granted, at Le Rosey our Learning Partners model is different from a “traditional” coaching model: our team is larger than the 2-3 individuals a typical school in North America might have and is made up of volunteers. Our learning partners are full-time teachers and not “experts” on a specific component of teaching and learning (e.g. classroom management, formative assessment, focused reading strategies); they are trained in facilitative coaching to support a colleague in identifying a goal, action steps and ways of measuring success towards those goals; and they practice Jim Knight’s Better Conversations beliefs and habits, which guide our work as empathetic, non-judgemental listeners.
Nevertheless, what we are trying to accomplish is “transformational” because we are developing our school’s approach to professional development by giving teachers choice and voice, and by fostering trust through more open, honest, collegial communication.
So, in an effort to be open and honest, let’s tackle Elena Aguilar’s 10 key elements at this early stage, and see what we can learn from the reflection.
1. Articulate a Definition and Vision.
Aguilar recommends schools have “a simple, memorable statement that defines coaching” at our school. Given our context, my statement would be:
Learning Partners support a teacher to develop professionally by facilitating reflection and encouraging deliberate practice to improve learning for their students.
For me, the key ideas I want to highlight in that statement are that (a) Learning Partners are an important part of our school’s CPD program; (b) Learning Partners facilitate reflection, but they do not appraise or prescribe; (c) Learning Partners understand that change doesn’t happen without deliberate practice over time until the new actions become habits; (d) Learning Partners help the teacher focus their goals on student learning.
2. Consider the Context.
We want continuous professional development (CPD) at our school to be coherent and aligned: schoolwide trainings with external consultants, group initiatives (e.g. collaborative networks and/or departmental initiatives) and the Professional Learning Plan (PLP), through which a teacher can refine an area of professional practice. One of the ways we are aligning CPD is by working together on the Principles for High Quality Learning, which remain at the forefront of what we do. For example, the self-reflection document at the core of the PLP stems from those principles, and our schoolwide curriculum review is also carefully aligned. However, one area where we could improve would be to seek greater clarity on the connection between the Principles for High Quality Learning and smaller group initiatives (departmental, collaborative networks or other). This could be achieved by posing a related question to HODs/CN facilitators as they plan their initiatives.
3. Choose a Coaching Model.
The Professional Learning Plan (PLP) itself is not a “coaching model”—it is a model for individual professional development based on trust and respect for each teacher. However, we are following a “model” for the professional conversations we want to promote: Learning Partners are trained (and training) in Jim Knight’s Better Conversations model and his instructional coaching format called the Impact Cycle. (It is important to note that Jim Knight is working with Le Rosey to customise his model to fit the goals for our PLP and for the learning partnerships we are trying to create, which will be mostly facilitative in approach.) What is important to highlight here is that all Learning Partners are following the same training and will be working with the same objectives and conversation format. We believe that this will give greater coherence to the PLP experience, and will also help promote the beliefs and habits espoused in Better Conversations.
4. Set Program Goals.
The goals of the Professional Learning Plan are to give every teacher at our school the advantage of working with a supportive, non-judgemental Learning Partner to identify a goal plus the steps towards that goal, and to measure success. We want all teachers to have this opportunity within a 3-year window, and to review their goals and their progress in a 3-year cycle. There is no “hidden agenda” or additional goals for the Professional Learning Plan—it is what professionals should engage in on a regular basis and it is time we have a clear structure that enables and supports that practice. We believe that if all teachers have the opportunity to focus on one aspect of their teaching that is both important to them and that will have a clear impact on student learning, our school as a whole will continue to improve.
5. Hire the Right Coaches.
Aguilar writes that “A good coach is an expert on adult learning”. I think this point is well made, and I want to be mindful that we do not let it slip. At our school we are not hiring external coaches or creating a “coaching office” with new hirees or promoted members of staff: our work is more collegial and our group is made up of volunteers. The strengths of this approach is that we have a strong team of highly motivated, interested colleagues who are not signing up for money or other extrinsic rewards, but rather are keen to improve how we communicate at the school and move towards greater trust and transparency. In this respect, they are the “right” coaches. That said, I understand the importance of being able to assess the results in light of the goals we have articulated. I also think that those who are giving their time, energy and effort to support others will need the time and resources to carry out that responsibility.
6. Build the Coaching Relationship.
Jim Knight’s training strongly supports Aguilar’s claim that, “For a teacher to reflect on the aspects of his practice where he feels most uncertain, he must feel that his coach will suspend judgment, maintain unconditional positive regard for him, see his potential, and keep conversations in confidence.” That is precisely the relationship we want to build as Learning Partners, and Jim Knight’s beliefs and habits help articulate what this looks like.
7. Understand How Coaching Works.
We have developed a clear format for how we think the learning partnership could work at Le Rosey (allowing for individual adjustments, of course!):
- A first meeting focuses on a discussion around the teacher’s self-reflection document and the portfolio of teaching and learning, in order to identify possible goals. At that meeting, the teacher, with support from their Learning Partner, may identify additional data-gathering tools to be applied.
- A second meeting focuses on a review of new data gathered, in order to identify a goal that is (a) compelling to the teacher, (b) reachable, (c) specific and measurable, and (d) that will have a positive impact on student learning. The teacher would also decide on concrete steps towards that goal and any necessary resources.
- A third meeting focuses on a checkpoint for the process: the goal identified, the strategies used, and the progress made towards the goal. In light of findings, the goal or the strategies may be adjusted or changed according to the teacher’s needs.
- A fourth meeting focuses on how the new strategies are being practised deliberately: what are some obstacles or difficulties, what are some successes? This is a great opportunity to strengthen the commitment to the goal and strategies identified to meet students’ needs.
- A fifth meeting focuses on the reflection of the process. Final conclusions or further action steps can be identified and recorded, with the view to return to these (if necessary) at the next Professional Learning Plan review. This information is recorded in a 1-page summary. The 1-page summary will be the only component of the PLP to be shared with the respective HOD and Academic Director. All other exchanges and data remain confidential.
After our first PLP cycle we will have tested the process, but we are confident we “understand how coaching works” mostly because we realise it is a process: the teacher needs to feel confident that the new practice they want to incorporate has become a habit, and the Learning Partner can support them in reaching a goal that will be applied long-term.
8. Protect Confidential Communication.
This is a point that has been pushed very strongly, since my early surveys of teacher opinions around “appraisal”, to the collaborative network that followed, to the discussions around my PLP proposal. For a culture of trust and transparency to blossom, confidentiality is paramount. Learning Partners must remember and practice this at all times. Aguilar encourages Learning Partners to remind the teacher they work with that they will never share information without that teacher’s consent. I believe we will need practice in responding to questions like, “So how is X doing in their PLP?” or “Can I take a look at some of that data?”. Aguilar suggests a lighthearted response: “You know I can’t share any observations or opinions on X. Why don’t you go visit her class and form your own opinions?”.
One concrete step we will take to ensure confidentiality is by keeping the teacher’s self-reflection document, portfolio of teaching and learning, and gathered data completely private between the Learning Partner and the teacher. Further, all materials created during that Professional Learning Plan review (e.g. video footage, transcripts or observation notes) will be owned by the teacher, not the Learning Partner. Another step in place is that a short, one-page summary will be created at the end of the PLP cycle between the teacher and the Learning Partner. This means that the teacher will be involved in producing the only document that will become accessible to HODs and/or academic directors.
9. Evaluate Your Efforts.
When I read Aguilar’s article, this was the section that struck me the most. Aguilar identifies it as the “weakest” in the schools she’s worked with, and I can see why: how do we evaluate the PLP model, the work of our Learning Partners and its impact on the school? Where do we begin? Should the evaluation be a “customer satisfaction” survey? Should we have “markers” for what we are looking for in the learning partnerships, and if so, what would they be if we also want goals to be individual and individualised? Perhaps a good system to put in place would be to read through all one-page summaries after each cycle, in order to analyse the comments and look for patterns. Reflecting on the goals teachers identify, the type of improvements they want to make in their practice and their areas of interest might provide excellent insight into the concerns of our faculty as a whole. These could in turn inform the choices we make for schoolwide CPD in light of our Principles for High Quality Learning. Another way to evaluate our efforts could be to read the final comments on the one-page summaries to see how teachers feel after the cycle: are they energised? Grateful? Discouraged? Tired? All of these pointers could help us improve the PLP structure itself.
10. Establish Professional Development for Coaches.
We can all agree that a two-day seminar with Jim Knight is insufficient to train a Learning Partner in being a facilitative, non-judgmental listener. The additional eight weekly virtual sessions we had with him (plus at least one individual Zoom meeting) provided additional structure to practise our “better conversations”. The next step in our development as Learning Partners will be to work in pairs and practise the full Professional Learning Plan cycle with each other. Each Learning Partner will act in turn as the Learning Partner and as the teacher who is reflecting on their practice to complete the PLP. Learning Partners will engage in a collaborative network during the autumn 2020 term, including additional meetings with Jim Knight in order to support them through this new experience. They will have time to debrief their individual involvement and fine-tune their practice before officially launching the PLP to the wider staff in the spring of 2021. We hope this provides the right pace and support structure for all our Learning Partners to excel. After that, further training on specific teaching strategies or cognitive research-based techniques and elements of Knight’s Impact Cycle might become objectives for the group. It is best to remain open-minded about long-term PD for our Learning Partners.
If Elena Aguilar’s 10 key elements guide a school in gauging if they have the right structures to promote a culture where learning partnerships will thrive, I hope this reflection shows that we have what it takes to launch a successful Professional Learning Plan!
Sources:
Aguilar, Elena. “You Can’t Have a Coaching Culture Without a Structure”. Educational Leadership, Vol. 77, No. 3. November, 2019.
Aguilar, Elena. The art of coaching: effective strategies for school transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2013.
