Thorny Coaching Issue:

When I work with schools on setting up instructional coaching, a question I get asked A LOT is:

"But, who should coach who?"

I've found a paper with an answer: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/erictaylor/files/learning-from-colleagues-pttl.pdf

Lots of schools argue that coaching pairs should be Novice - - > Expert, or that teachers should be exclusively paired with subject specialists.

Insight:

Papay and colleagues argue that coaches should be matched with teachers around specific skills. For example, a teacher that is weak in behaviour management is paired with an expert in this area.

There's significant evidence that this method has a real impact.

Papay argues that this isn't the same as classic mentoring where novice teachers are paired with general experts.

His model suggests that peer coaching is a good solution, provided peers are paired accordingly to complementary strengths and weaknesses.

Strengths:

I'm a big supporter of schools moving towards a peer coaching model. I think this is a major way of building a great culture of improvement AND of making coaching cost effective.

I also like how responsive this solution feels to the reality of teacher development.

Concerns:

- Should / how should I evaluate my staff for strengths and weaknesses?

Papay recognises that this data is not reliable AND I think that it feels suspiciously like a formal obs.

How else could we build these pairs?

Would be v. keen to find out your thoughts!