Coaching Continuum and Technology

Retrieved from https://dianesweeney.com/becoming-student-centered/

Coaching Continua Defined:
"Model that requires that the coach 'learn to flow between the roles of consultant, collaborator-mentor, and coach . . . to stimulate and fuel an accelerated model of learning' " (Marzano & Simms, 2013, p. 15).

"An open form of coaching consists of you observing other teachers, administrators, mentors, supervisors or other coaches within your school building and then throughout other schools in a district or organization" (Performance Learning Systems, 2019, n.p.).

The continuum is an outline of the three coaching methods "in terms of the role of the coach, the focus for coaching, the use of data and materials, how the coach is perceived, and the role of relationships" and that it "helps coaches and school leaders understand how student-centered coaching compares with other ways of approaching coaching" (Sweeney & Harris, 2017, p. 5). 

All three of the above definitions give a completely different perspective of what a coaching continuum looks like in education.  The one I plan to implement is based on the above graphic from Student-Centered Coaching: The Moves by Diane Sweeney. The graphic shows a continuum from less impact on students to more impact on students.  It is clear that in order to make an impact on student learning, coaches spend the majority of the time in the role of student-centered coach.

How does the student-centered coaching continuum apply to technology-based instructional strategies?

"Research about how technology is used by teachers ... indicates a predominance of teacher-centric pedagogies" (Polly & Binns, 2018, p. 632).  Polly and Binns (2018) add that "there is a need to provide ample support with content-specific examples of technology integration" (p. 632).  In order to impact pedagogy and provide content-specific support, I plan to use student-centered coaching to take the focus off of the teacher (what he/she does or doesn't know) and focus on reaching student goals.  These goals are written by the teacher based on standards with support from me as the coach.  We will then integrate technology into the lessons with the level of support needed from me while still focusing on the goals we have for the students.

Retrieved from https://www.citejournal.org/volume-18/issue-4-18/science/elementary-education-candidates-integration-of-technology-in-science-units/

Once we have our content standard goal, then we will use the continuum in Table 1 to have teachers determine the level of technology use in their classrooms in the content area of science. Polly and Binns (2018) point out "technology and science activities that promote problem solving and critical thinking lead to deeper learning of science concepts" (p. 632).  One of the ways the "technology integration knowledge is developed" is with modeling of technology integration in the classroom with the teacher (Polly & Binns, 2018, p. 632).  Another important focus should be "design of instruction, which is a foundational and critical step in the process of teaching with technology" (Polly & Binns, 2018, p. 642).  This focus is based around using the technological, peagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) model. View the video to learn more about this model.

The student-centered coaching continuum guides my practice as a coach while supporting the integration of technology into content areas.  By using it as a tool in my coaching cycles, I can revisit it during reflection to ensure I am supporting the teacher in a way that has the most impact on students. It also provides a way for me to explain my role to school leaders and teachers to support the premise that I do not have an evaluative role in my work within our partnership.