A taxonomy, as reflected in the document “Instructional Coaching Scale” by Susan K. Woodruff, might be a very useful tool for coaches to use both as a measure of coaching success for every teacher with whom the coach interacts, and as an organizational tool for the coach to keep track of interactions with various teachers. I am an academic coach in a school with over 70 teachers, so keeping track of my interactions and the nature of these interactions is very important to the goal of increased student achievement. As the teachers improve upon their instructional best practices, students will always be the beneficiaries.
In her article, Woodruff explains why instructional coaching experts develop such a taxonomy: “Administrators have a responsibility to be fiscally conservative. They are keepers of the public trust. Sometimes making the decision to hire an instructional coach or to contract for coaching for follow-up of professional development is a tough decision. Dollars spent for coaching means that those dollars won’t be spent on something else. Documenting the impact of coaching (or lack of it) is the first step to good decision making. Data collection and examination of that data is an important step in determining impact. Coaches themselves can begin to look at patterns, successes, and difficulties to make necessary adjustments in what they are doing. Bottom line, coaches are hired for the express purpose of increasing implementation and facilitating change with those with whom they work.” Using the taxonomy to document coaching successes and coaching opportunities is a good idea on multiple fronts.
Coaching for technology integration is another sound application of the taxonomy Woodruff refers to in her article. This taxonomy is really all about documenting the process of change…adopting and adapting. Any new practice—from a teaching strategy to the integration of a new idea with technology—is about change…going from one way of doing things to a different, improved way. Building relationships, developing trust, and altering perceptions are all part of the process in ensuring positive change.
In her article, Woodruff explains why instructional coaching experts develop such a taxonomy: “Administrators have a responsibility to be fiscally conservative. They are keepers of the public trust. Sometimes making the decision to hire an instructional coach or to contract for coaching for follow-up of professional development is a tough decision. Dollars spent for coaching means that those dollars won’t be spent on something else. Documenting the impact of coaching (or lack of it) is the first step to good decision making. Data collection and examination of that data is an important step in determining impact. Coaches themselves can begin to look at patterns, successes, and difficulties to make necessary adjustments in what they are doing. Bottom line, coaches are hired for the express purpose of increasing implementation and facilitating change with those with whom they work.” Using the taxonomy to document coaching successes and coaching opportunities is a good idea on multiple fronts.
Coaching for technology integration is another sound application of the taxonomy Woodruff refers to in her article. This taxonomy is really all about documenting the process of change…adopting and adapting. Any new practice—from a teaching strategy to the integration of a new idea with technology—is about change…going from one way of doing things to a different, improved way. Building relationships, developing trust, and altering perceptions are all part of the process in ensuring positive change.