It’s that time of year when new coaches may find themselves wondering, “What do I do in August if I don’t have a classroom to prepare?’” Some new coaches might not even have an office to set up. Experienced coaches are reflecting upon what they have learned about coaching in their experiences up to now and how that leaning will impact their actions in the coming year. Sharron Helmke, senior vice president of professional services at Learning Forward and  a professional certified coach with the International Coaching Federation shared some great insights in an article, “6 things I wish I’d known as a new coach.”

Here are the first three insights she shared along with my reflections. Part 2 will examine her other three.

#1 Coaching is not about fixing teachers’ problems for them.

Helmke – “My job as a coach is to help teachers process their own thinking by asking questions and reflecting back what I hear, rather than superimposing my solutions over theirs.”

I have been increasingly defining my coaching role as a “Thinking Partner.”  The coach-coachee partnership is engaged in co-constructing a plan that the teacher owns and thus a desire to risk change in order to gain a goal that belongs to the coachee. Dr. Kristine Needham describes that such coaching conversations frequently create an “Aha Moment,” a sense of new knowledge being created. She describes these moments as being powerful and capable of leading to a change in practice. I am often surprised when a coachee has such an “aha” and then tells me, “That’s a great idea!” They react as if I had shared the idea with them when most often, they were sharing the idea with me.

Needham provides this description of co-constructed collaborative coaching:

“Both the coach and the coachee are adept at navigating the conversion so that the relationships between critical incidents, episodes, the lesson as a whole, and relevant pedagogical frameworks are discussed. Conversation is such that the role of coach and coachee blurs as they explore practice, recognizing and resolving dissonance so that new ideas emerge through their collaborative dialogue. This creates a feedback loop which promotes future planning.”

#2 Being a “servant leader” is about serving students by improving their educational outcomes.

Helmke: “It’s about asking the difficult questions to make educators think critically about their current practice, its impact on student outcomes, and how they can meet student needs that are not yet being adequately addressed.”

In an earlier blog, I explored the importance of Joellen Killion’s 2008 article, “Are You Coaching Heavy or Light” in focusing the early days of instructional coaching on student outcomes.  Joellen defined light coaching as  working to build and maintain relationships more than working to improve teaching and learning. I was consulting in many schools at that time, and it was common for folks starting a coaching position to provide a lot of “help” to teachers— hoping to build relationships. Joellen noted that they provided demonstration lessons and shared curriculum materials, but the pressure was not on teachers to apply learning in their classrooms to increase student success.

Joellen described heavy coaching as coaching that feels heavy to the teacher because of the weight of collective responsibility and commitment that the teacher is devoting to the success of every student.  Coaching brings that reflection to the teacher’s mind. It’s not the coach “being heavy.” Coaching heavy causes a teacher to feel on edge because they’re questioning their actions and their decisions, thinking about what they might do to have a greater impact on their students.

#3 Coaches build relationships while coaching.

Helmke: “When coaching is done well, relationship-building is embedded in the process… You are continually building on a solid foundation and gradually inviting ever deeper coaching conversations.”

Previously, I explored Michael Bungay Stainer’s book, “How to Work with (Almost) Anyone,” which focused on working relationships that are happier, more successful partnerships. He labeled these partnerships as “best possible relationships” (BPR). “They are safe, vital, and repairable.” I found many connections to coaching relationships. How do we build the “best possible coaching relationships?”  Bungay Stainer explored, “How would we fix it when things go wrong?” He suggested that by understanding that it will break and by talking about it before it does, you are be better able to notice when its failing and repair it together.”

Recognizing the role of trust in coaching relationships, I frequently stress this statement in my work with school administrators and coaches, “Say what you are going to do, and then do it.”  If I say what I am going to do and my actions appear to you as not matching what I promised, either I have made a mistake, or you have misinterpreted my words or action. If we can agree in advance on how to raise the issue when that “incongruent sense” emerges an understanding or a quick fix with a return to trust is possible.

In part two I’ll look at Helmke’s other three insights:

• Effective coaching starts with a strengths-based approach
• Coaches and leaders set an example — positive or negative — for professional learning
• Coaches need support, too.

DownloadPrint