read liberia activity - united states agency for

Read Liberia Activity

Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready)

(Sub-IR 2.3, Technical Deliverable No. 5)

Submitted: March 29, 2019

USAID comments received: May 11, 2019

Revision submitted: May 29, 2019

Additional USAID comments received: May 31, 2019

Revision submitted: June 2, 2019

USAID approved: June 3, 2019

This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by RTI International for the USAID Read Liberia Activity.

USAID Liberia

Read Liberia Activity

Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready)

(Sub-IR 2.3, Technical Deliverable # 5)

Contract Number: AID-669-C-17-00003

Prepared for USAID Liberia

United States Agency for International Development Office of Acquisition and Assistance

ATTN: Contracting Officer’s Representative

502 Benson Street

1000 Monrovia

10 Liberia

Prepared by RTI International

3040 Cornwallis Road Post Office Box 12194

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194

RTI International is a registered trademark and a trade name of Research Triangle Institute.

This publication is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID.) The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the Contractor and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

Read Liberia Activity Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready) Page i

This publication was produced with support from the U.S. Agency for International Development through the USAID Read Liberia Activity under Contract No. AID-669-C-17-00003.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA 3rd Street Sinkor P.O. BOX 10-9012 1000 MONROVIA 10 LIBERIA WEST AFRICA

This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO (CC BY 3.0 IGO). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under a Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, even for commercial purposes, under the following conditions:

Attribution—If you copy and distribute this work in its entirety, without making changes to content or illustrations, please cite the work as follows: Reproduced from an original work by the USAID and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license.

Translations—If you create a translation of this work, please use the following label on your work: Translated from an original work developed by the USAID and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license. This translation was not created by USAID and should not be considered an official USAID translation. USAID is not liable for any content or error in this translation.

Adaptations—If you create an adaptation of this work, please use the following label on your work: This is an adaptation of an original work developed by the USAID and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO. Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by USAID.

Third party content—USAID does not necessarily own each component of the content contained within

the work. USAID therefore does not warrant that the use of any third-party owned individual component or

part contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of those third parties. The risk of claims resulting

from such infringement rests solely with you. If you wish to re-use a component of the work, it is your

responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that re-use and to obtain permission from the

copyright owner. Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables, figures, or images.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo

https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/buttons/88x31/png/by.png

Read Liberia Activity Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready) Page ii

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... ii

Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................... iii

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1

Background .............................................................................................................. 1

Theoretical Approaches to Coaching ....................................................................... 2

Read Liberia’s Approach to Coaching ...................................................................... 3

Coach Profile ............................................................................................................ 5 Education Qualifications ......................................................................................................... 5 Work Experience .................................................................................................................... 5 Additional Desired Characteristics ......................................................................................... 5

Coach Roles ............................................................................................................. 6

Coach-Teacher Relationship .................................................................................... 7

Coach-Teacher Engagement ................................................................................... 8 Program Design ...................................................................................................................... 8 Coach Visit Protocol ............................................................................................................... 8

Classroom observation ................................................................................................. 9 Rating the observation ................................................................................................ 12 Coach-teacher conference to provide lesson feedback ............................................. 13 Lesson modeling and co-teaching .............................................................................. 15 Student reading spot checks ....................................................................................... 16

Training Sessions ................................................................................................................. 17

Coach-School-Community Engagement ................................................................ 17 Teacher Circles ..................................................................................................................... 17 Principals and Instructional Vice Principals .......................................................................... 18 District Education Officers .................................................................................................... 18 Community ............................................................................................................................ 19

Accountability Measures ........................................................................................ 19 Coach Supervisors ............................................................................................................... 19 Communication and Documentation .................................................................................... 20 Technology ........................................................................................................................... 21

Considerations for Sustainability ............................................................................ 21 Engaging and Progressively Developing MOE Technical Capacity .................................... 22 Continuing Use of Resources Developed Through Read Liberia ........................................ 22 Choosing Cost-Effective Strategies ...................................................................................... 22

Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 24

References ............................................................................................................. 26

Appendix A. Classroom Observation Instrument for Grades 1 and 2 ....................... 1

Appendix B. Classroom Observation Instrument for Kindergarten ........................... 1

Appendix C. Monthly Coach Support Tracker .......................................................... 1

Read Liberia Activity Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready) Page iii

List of exhibits Exhibit 1. Three Coaching Models ............................................................................. 3

Exhibit 2. Areas of Support Provided by Coaches through Read Liberia’s Coaching Model ................................................................................................................... 4

Exhibit 3. Classroom Observation Scores and Risk Categories ............................... 13

Read Liberia Activity Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready) Page iv

Acronyms and Abbreviations

CTTC Coordinator for Teacher Training and Coaching

DEO District Education Officer

EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment

G1, G2 Grade 1, Grade 2

GPS Global Positioning System

IR Intermediate Result

KG Kindergarten

LTTP Liberia Teacher Training Project

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MOE Ministry of Education

PTA Parent-Teacher Association

USAID United States Agency for International Development

Read Liberia Activity Cost-effective, Evidence-based Coaching Model (Print Ready) Page 1

Introduction The key objectives of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)-

funded Read Liberia Activity are to improve early grade reading skills for approximately

172,800 Liberian students in grades 1 and 2 (G1 and G2) in 640 selected public and a few

community schools in six targeted counties (Bong, Grand Bassa, Lofa, Margibi, Montserrado

and Nimba), and to pilot instructional approaches for the development of children’s emergent

literacy skills, specifically oral language development and vocabulary skills, for an estimated

5,400 kindergarten (KG) students in 60 of these schools. Read Liberia continues to build on

evidence from previous efforts to improve early grade reading that have been made by

USAID/Liberia and other actors with the Ministry of Education (MOE), such as through the

USAID-funded Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) Plus: Liberia project and the

Liberia Teacher Training Project (LTTP). The goal of the five-year Read Liberia Activity is

that public primary school students in the six targeted counties will read and understand

grade-level text in English after two years of schooling, and that KG students in the 60 pilot

schools will develop the oral vocabulary required for beginning literacy skills.

The Read Liberia Activity has four intermediate results: (1) government commitment to, and

support of, evidence-based reading instruction increased; (2) early grade reading classroom

instruction improved; (3) service delivery systems in early grade reading improved; and (4)

parent, community, and private support for early grade reading increased. An integral

component of Sub-result 2 is the improvement of field-based pedagogical coaching support

to reading teachers to continuously improve the quality of their teaching practices and

student learning outcomes.

This document presents in detail the Read Liberia Activity model of pedagogical coaching to

support KG – G2 teachers in the implementation of innovative strategies and activities to

increase early grade reading skills. It is submitted in fulfillment of the deliverable “Print ready

cost-effective, evidence based coaching model” (Sub IR 2.3, Technical Deliverable #5).

Background Emphasis on early grade reading is relatively new in Liberia. While local universities offer a

degree in primary education, few courses focus on emergent or foundational literacy. Many

of the teachers currently teaching in KG – G2 have earned only a “C” certificate from a

Teacher Training Institute after three to nine months of training. The certificate enables the

recipient to teach only in the primary grades. A “B” certificate, which some primary teachers

have, enables the teacher to teach in primary or secondary grades. The result is that few

classroom teachers understand how a child learns to read and the steps necessary to build

reading skills.

The KG-G2 national curriculum addresses early grade reading in a theoretical context. The

current national curriculum provides topics that the teacher should follow but not the detailed

instructions that teachers unfamiliar with teaching children to read require. The MOE

recognizes this gap and cooperates closely with programs such as Read Liberia to improve

the quality of the curriculum. However, many KG – G2 teachers currently in the classroom

lack the necessary training or access to resources to offer quality reading instruction.

To support early grade reading initiatives, the MOE has endorsed, but not instituted, donor-

supported coaching programs. Beginning in 2008 with the USAID Liberia Teacher Training

Project (LTTP) as well as other various donor-funded projects, participating schools have

been introduced to a coaching model. But a nationwide, MOE-initiated coaching program

has not yet been introduced.


Coaches who know how a child acquires reading skills, appreciate the challenges KG-G2

teachers face, and understand the situational context are needed to build the early grade

reading instructional competencies of Liberian KG-G2 teachers. Coaches support teachers

to continue to use the activities and approaches introduced in Read Liberia trainings.

Theoretical Approaches to Coaching Teacher quality is a key contributor to student learning outcomes.1 Any initiative that seeks to

improve student learning needs to take into consideration the support teachers need to

continuously improve their practices. No matter how naturally talented or well-trained a

person may be, becoming a skilled and effective teacher does not magically happen

overnight. As with any skill, teachers develop their expertise over time. Pre-service

coursework and ongoing in-service training workshops can be helpful in introducing teachers

to the science of teaching, to the theoretical underpinnings of pedagogy, and to traditional as

well as new pedagogical practices. However, impact evaluations of training programs have

shown that without additional support, innovations introduced in training sessions often fall

short of generating widespread improvements in teacher practices or student outcomes,

especially when these improvements are implemented at scale.2

One kind of teacher professional development that has been shown to be a potent

complement to training is in-classroom teacher coaching. Coaching can be defined as

“providing on-site, job-embedded, sustained professional development for teachers.”3

Effective coaching offers teachers individualized, active learning focused on discrete skills

for a sustained duration. Coaching programs in numerous and varied contexts have

demonstrated success in improving teacher performance and student learning,4 including in

Liberia through LTTP, the predecessor to the Read Liberia Activity.

Coaches’ specific responsibilities vary from one context to another, but they usually include

meeting with teachers one-on-one to observe their teaching and helping them improve it. In

addition, coaches can look at student assessment data together with the teacher; strategize

with the teacher to identify and trouble-shoot problems, provide resources; co-teach or

model a lesson; and generally advocate for learning at the school and in the community.5

Additionally, as a complement to the one-on-one interaction, coaches sometimes facilitate

group meetings where teachers can share their experiences and ideas with one another.6

The literature on coaching sometimes distinguishes between two basic approaches:

“directive” or “hard” coaching on one hand, and “reflective” or “soft” coaching on the other.

In directive coaching, the focus is on ensuring the teacher’s conformity to a particular, pre-

established, desired practice, as in fidelity of implementation to a scripted lesson plan. In this

approach, “coaches assume the role of expert and are assertive about what instructional

practices teachers must implement.”7 The coaches’ first priority is to ensure that teachers

are executing the steps as they have been trained to do. Some education experts have

suggested that directive coaching may be preferable in contexts where teachers—and

1 Darling-Hammond, 2000; Goe, 2007; Chetty, Friedman, & Rocko, 2014. 2 Harris & Sass, 2011; Kennedy, 2016. 3 Bean, 2014, p.7. 4 See Kraft, Blazar, & Hogan, 2018, for a meta-analysis of 60 studies in high-income contexts; Biancarosa, Bryk, & Dexter, 2010; Elish-Piper & L’Allier 2011; Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010; Walpole, McKenna, Uribe-Zarain, & Lamitina, 2010; Bruns, Costa, & Cunha, 2018 (Brazil); Cilliers, Fleisch, Prinsloox, & Taylor, 2018 (South Africa); Hussain & Ali, 2010 (Pakistan); Majerowicz & Montero, 2018 (Peru); Piper & Zuilkowski, 2015 (Kenya); Sailors, et al., 2014 (Malawi); Tolley, Johnson, & Koszalka, 2012 (Thailand).

5 Joyce & Showers, 2002; L’Allier, Elish-Piper, & Bean, 2010. 6 National Institute for Excellence in Teaching, 2012. 7 Ippolito, 2010, p. 165.


sometimes even the coaches themselves—have not had much previous training or

experience in specific pedagogical practices (e.g. in literacy instruction), or when they are

learning to use a new method or new materials. Culturally, directive coaching may be a

better fit in contexts where coaches have traditionally played a supervisory or inspectorial

role, or where the system places high stakes on fidelity of implementation.

Reflective coaching, on the other hand, emphasizes teachers’ agency in their own

professional development and strives to help them grow into practitioners who continuously

examine their own practice, make decisions, and take steps to improve. Reflective coaching

is ““… invitational in nature, respecting teacher expertise, embracing multiple perspectives of

teaching literacy, and generally non-confrontational.”8 Reflective coaching actively engages

the teacher in reflecting on what is happening and should be done versus just telling them.

Reflective coaching may be more successful in with highly trained or experienced teachers

who need less scaffolding and can strategically adapt their practices on their own.9

A third approach, which combines elements of the first two, has been called “balanced”

coaching.10 Balanced coaching intentionally pairs promoting specific best practices with

respecting teacher agency and encouraging teacher reflection (see Exhibit 1).

Exhibit 1. Three Coaching Models

Read Liberia’s Approach to Coaching The Read Liberia coaching model follows the balanced approach. Read Liberia recognizes that teachers in this context face many challenges and can benefit from directive coaching as they acquire new pedagogical practices.

At the same time, Read Liberia supports a long-term model of teacher development in which teachers are active participants in and drivers of their own professional growth. By setting in place certain reflective practices, even as simple as asking the teacher to say what they thought of their own lesson, what they did well, and what they want to improve, the Read

8 McKenna & Walpole, 2008. 9 Bean, 2014. 10 Ippolito, 2010.


Liberia coaching model lays the groundwork to allow the coach-teacher relationship to evolve over time as the teachers’ level of expertise and needs evolve.11

The Read Liberia coaching model encompasses seven areas of support: instructional resources, training, classroom observation, post-observation feedback through teacher-coach conferences, lesson modeling, student reading spot checks, and school and community engagement (see Exhibit 2). Using instructional resources including training manuals, classroom teaching and learning materials provided to teachers and students, observation and conference protocols, assessments, and report cards, Read Liberia coaches support each of the other six areas. The model provides continuous support to improve classroom delivery of early grade reading instruction.

Exhibit 2. Areas of Support Provided by Coaches through Read Liberia’s Coaching Model

The remainder of this document describes each aspect of the Read Liberia model in detail, including the profile of a coach, the role of the coach, the coach-teacher relationship, the coach’s engagement with teachers, as well as the school and its community, accountability structures. Each aspect of the model is informed by the international evidence base of effective coach practices, and supporting references are given throughout. Read Liberia considers cost effectiveness throughout the proposed coaching model, as well as sustainability of the model, described in the section “Sustainability and Cost Effectiveness.”

11 Collet, 2012; Zigmond, Bean, Kloo, & Brydon, 2010; L’Allier, Elish-Piper, & Bean, 2010.


Coach Profile

Education Qualifications

Ideally, coaches will have both teaching expertise and experience in the content area and at the grade levels in which they coach.12 Standard teacher credentials help coaches establish credibility in the schools where they work, but advanced credentials or administrative experience are not necessarily a prerequisite for being an effective coach.13 Read Liberia engages coaches who preferably have a bachelor or associate degree in education but recognizes that a strong technical grasp of the content pedagogy can be built in different ways, through a combination of theoretical and practical training, plus experience.

Work Experience

Classroom teaching experience gives coaches invaluable insight that helps them relate to teachers in their daily challenges. Candidates should have at least three years’ experience working in education in Liberia, preferably as a classroom teacher and in other roles supporting the improvement of teaching practice (e.g. coach, vice principal for instruction, etc.). The Activity acknowledges that in many remote areas, finding a coach with the preferred education qualifications may be difficult, if not impossible. To mitigate this challenge, Read Liberia also considers work/life experience in the remote areas in lieu of college degrees. In addition, coaches who live in or near the school communities bring the value of understanding the culture as well as the cost savings of not having to travel far distances to reach their schools. The flexibility to combine work and educational experiences is particularly useful in the recruitment of coaches to support teachers in the hard-to-reach schools in remote rural areas.

Primarily, Read Liberia seeks to identify people who are willing and able to dedicate time and energy to improving early grade reading instruction in the schools where they are assigned.

Additional Desired Characteristics

Many coaches are called upon to guide teachers through instructional approaches that are relatively new to the coaches themselves as well; therefore, coaches need to be quick learners, dynamic, flexible, open to new ideas, and embracing of change. Moreover, given the centrality of the coach-teacher relationship, the coach must be able to maintain excellent rapport with teachers and other stakeholders. In fact, these personal attributes and others can sometimes compensate for other deficiencies in the coach’s background.

Therefore, Read Liberia strives to recruit coaches who meet the following criteria:

• Excellent interpersonal and communication skills

• Ability to build rapport with key stakeholders

• Ability to work independently with minimal supervision

• Extensive experience with data collection

• Ability to manage multiple priorities and demanding timeframes.

• Ability to work as part of a team

• Good organizational skills

• Discretion when dealing with confidential information

12 International Literacy Association, 2004; L’Allier, Elish-Piper, & Bean, 2010 13 Harden, Pflepsen, & King, 2018


• Professionalism, integrity, and honesty

• Optimistic with supportive attitude

• Detail-oriented

• Time management skills

• Self-driven with a high sense of responsibility

• Willingness to work at whatever time is convenient to the community, e.g., early morning, late evening, holidays, weekends, etc.

• Ability to travel.

Coach Roles The coach has two primary goals:

• Improving teaching practice, with a particular emphasis on increasing the use of

highly effective, evidence-based practices,14 and

• Improving learner academic and behavioral outcomes through improved teaching

practices.15

To accomplish these goals, the coach must assume a variety of roles within the school

community.16

Resource Provider: As a resource provider, the coach assists teachers with materials,

tools, and information to support classroom instruction. Read Liberia provides an array of

resources such as teaching and learning materials, supplementary readers, instructional

aids, and assessments that the coach can assist the teacher to use effectively. The coach

may also discover additional resources within the school and community to share with the

teacher.

Instructional Supporter: The coach is instrumental in reassuring teachers that innovations

introduced in Read Liberia trainings do not increase teachers’ instructional load; instead, the

strategies and activities enhance their delivery of the national curriculum. Co-planning units

with the teacher lead to greater understanding of how Read Liberia activities actually

implement the existing curriculum.

Mentor: As a mentor, the coach focuses on the teachers’ strengths and provides support

and guidance to overcome weaknesses. The coach may model lessons, encourage

reflective practices, assist with small group instruction, help with student assessments, and

co-create classroom management techniques which support instruction.

Catalyst for Change: A coach models and facilitates continuous improvement at the

classroom and school levels. As a catalyst for change, the coach must motivate and

encourage teachers, school leaders, and PTAs to try new ideas and to think differently about

current practices and activities.

Learner: One of the most important coach roles is to model continuous learning and the

value of being a lifelong learner. The coach, as learner, is aware of the needs of the

teacher, understands the learning process, provides opportunities for proactive support, and

leads the teachers and school community as they journey toward changing their knowledge,

attitudes, skills, aspirations, and behaviors.

14 Knight, 2007; Snyder et al., 2015 15 Snyder et al., 2015 16 Wolpert-Gawron, Heather, 2016.


As coaches implement the tasks described in the sections below, they need to assume

various roles to provide the necessary support and guidance for teachers to implement their

best instructional practices.

Coach-Teacher Relationship As described above, the key role of

Read Liberia coaches is to help

teachers build their pedagogical

expertise and improve their students’

achievement. Coaching is unlikely to

have any influence unless the teachers

themselves are invested in the program.

As such, the nature of the coach-

teacher relationship is critical to the

effectiveness of the coaching program.

Being on the receiving end of coaching

puts teachers in a vulnerable position:

sooner or later, the coach is bound to

uncover shortcomings in their practice,

or to challenge them to try new

practices that lie beyond their current

comfort zone. It is human nature to shy

away from criticism or the risk or failure,

so many teachers approach the

coaching relationship warily. If they

sense that their dignity as an adult or as a professional–or worse yet, their job itself–is under

threat, they may respond defensively, resist, or shut down and not participate at all. This

defensiveness inhibits their ability to learn, grow, and reach their full potential.

In order to avoid the stifling effects of a hierarchical relationship, Read Liberia coaches serve

primarily as teachers’ colleagues, collaborators, partners, or teammates in their professional

development journey, rather than as supervisors or inspectors. The coach’s first

responsibility is to establish a positive and trusting rapport with each teacher so that

teachers feel safe and respected even as they explore their own areas for growth.17

The necessity of teacher buy-in and the risk of teacher resistance is common across

coaching programs, so preparing coaches to build positive relationships must be a priority.

As a coach trainer in one program in the United States described,

We can’t force teachers to do the kinds of things we’re talking about doing, so we spend a lot of time talking about the importance of building relationships and how do you do that and what kind of verbal skills do you have, and what nonverbal skills … you communicate.18

Indeed, affirmative verbal and non-verbal communication set the foundation of the coach-

teacher relationship. Studies have shown that skilled coaches build rapport by eliciting

teachers’ input through open-ended questions, listening to their responses without

interruption or rebuttal, paraphrasing their responses back to them for confirmation or

clarification, and demonstrating respect for their ideas and point of view, even while guiding

17 L’Allier, Elish-Piper, & Bean, 2010; Kraft, Blazar, & Hogan, 2018 18 Marsh, et al, 2008, p. 108

Coach assisting the teacher in planning a lesson


them into new practices.19 While this kind of communication is explicitly integrated into the

Read Liberia coach-teacher conference protocol (see below), it permeates the coach’s

whole relationship with the teacher.

Coach-Teacher Engagement

Program Design

One hallmark of an effective coaching program is sustained coach-teacher contact over time versus a one-time event, such as an in-service workshop. The literature on the ideal dosage of contact, however, is mixed. Many studies have found that more contact time leads to greater changes in teacher practice or student

learning gains;20 other studies have not found a direct

correlation.21 Furthermore, the frequency of contact is

constrained by many logistical factors, including the coach-to-teacher ratio (coaching load), the distance and accessibility of the schools in a given coach’s portfolio, and the school calendar (e.g. exam and holiday periods when regular instruction is paused), etc.

In the Read Liberia coaching program design, each Read Liberia coach serves an average of eight schools in as much geographic proximity to one another as possible in order to minimize costs associated with travel. The coach is based in or close to this cluster to facilitate visitation. The coach makes a minimum of one visit per month to each of his or her assigned schools during the months when school is in session. In addition, coaches lead a refresher teacher training workshop once a year within their respective clusters.

Coach Visit Protocol

The coach’s visit to the teacher at the school is at the heart of the coach’s work. As described above, the Read Liberia approach to coaching strikes a balance between directive and reflective coach practices. First and foremost, the coach uses the school visit to develop and maintain a positive rapport with the teacher so that the teacher feels safe and open to learning from the relationship. The coach is there to promote best practices, such as adherence to the lesson plans in the Read Liberia instructional materials. The coach is also there to provide opportunities for teachers to reflect critically on their own practice and

strategize about ways to improve it.22

The literature on coaching has identified the following high-leverage coaching practices that

encourage teacher improvement:23

19 Perkins, 1998; Heineke, 2013 20 Bean et al., 2010; Elish-Piper & L’Allier, 2011; Piper & Mugenda, 2013; Pouezevara, Costello, & Banda, 2012; Ross, 1992; Shidler, 2009; Yoon et al., 2007; Harden, Pflepsen, & King, 2018 21 Kraft, Blazar, & Hogan, 2018 22 Collet, 2012; Duffy, 2003; Heineke, 2013; Joyce & Showers, 2002; Schon, 1987 23 Bean et al., 2010; Kise, 2006; McCombs & Marsh, 2009; Stover, Kissel, Haag, & Shoniker, 2011

A coach motivating a teacher to be active in the lesson presentation.


• modeling instruction;

• observing the teacher in action;

• eliciting the teacher’s views and offering supportive feedback after the observed lesson;

• examining student learning outcomes and assessment results together;

• helping the teachers to set specific goals or an action plan;

• following up on the action plan at subsequent visits; and

• differentiating support according to teacher and student needs.

All these practices are embedded in the protocol for the Read Liberia coach visit. The

following sections describe these practices in detail.

Classroom observation

During each visit, the Read Liberia coach arranges with the teacher to observe a reading

lesson from beginning to end. The coach sits in the back or to the side of the classroom

where s/he can observe the whole class

while not obstructing the view of any

student. As the teacher teaches, the

coach fills out the first page of the

classroom observation form (see

Appendix A for G1 and G2 and Appendix

B for kindergarten). The coach records

enrollment and attendance for G1 and

G2, and the use of the Read Liberia

materials during the lesson, when

applicable. The rest of the form guides

the coach and teacher in focusing on the

key aspects of quality instruction as

described below. These aspects are

general enough to apply to any lesson

and constitute general goals for the

teacher to aspire to in improving their

own practice. Each aspect, described below, has a series of questions or indicators for the

coach to consider during the observation. For each aspect indicator, the coach marks “YES”

if the teacher consistently demonstrates this practice at all appropriate times throughout the

lesson. The coach marks “Partially” if the teacher demonstrates this practice when

appropriate during the lesson but not consistently, if the teacher implements it imperfectly, or

if the teacher has made some progress in this regard but still has room for improvement. The

coach marks “No” if the teacher does not demonstrate this practice in any meaningful way or

has major room for improvement in this regard. Note that the coach does not have to mark

the items in order.

Key aspects of quality instruction assessed during classroom observation:

1. Preparation: Did the teacher show evidence of having prepared for this lesson before starting to teach it? For example, did the teacher seem familiar with the lesson plan, write lesson notes, and prepare the necessary materials (e.g., letter cards, realia for vocabulary words, or text on chalkboard) ahead of time?

Strong preparation is essential for smooth lesson delivery. Different lessons will call for

different preparations–teachers will need to have extra materials on hand or write text on the

Coach using the electronic tablet provided by Read Liberia to capture observation data.


board ahead of time for some lessons but not others. Nonetheless, for all lessons, teachers

will need at a minimum to have read through the lesson beforehand and familiarized

themselves with the lesson content and steps. A teacher who is well prepared will be able to

execute the lesson smoothly with minimal hesitations, have clear instructions and

explanations at the ready, be able to read text fluently and with expression, etc. The coach

observes the teacher’s overall behavior for evidence that the teacher has adequately

prepared the lesson before class.

2. Content: Did the teacher cover the components for the day’s lesson as indicated in the teacher guide, including sufficient time for students to read aloud?

Before the teacher begins teaching, the coach asks him/her which lesson from the Read Liberia teacher’s guide s/he will be teaching. The coach keeps this lesson open and follows along as the teacher teaches so that s/he can easily observe whether the teacher covers all the lesson components as directed. All the activities in the daily lesson plans are important and work together to support the students’ development of essential reading skills. The coach also observes whether the teacher needs additional support in implementing any of the lesson components in particular. The coach pays particular attention to how well the students are engaged in reading letters, words, and connected text as called for in the lesson plans.

3. Method: Did the teacher use an effective instructional approach (e.g., “I Do – We Do – You Do”) as indicated in the teacher guide?

The coach refers to the Read Liberia teacher’s guide for the lesson that the teacher is

teaching and observes whether s/he follows the instructional approach prescribed for that

lesson. A common instructional approach used in the Read Liberia materials is called the

gradual release of responsibility model,24 or the “I Do – We Do – You Do approach.” In this

approach, the teacher models the reading activity for students (I Do), engages in the activity

along with students (We Do), and then gives students a chance to independently apply what

they have learned (You Do). When observing the lesson, the coach pays close attention to

whether the teacher executes all steps of the approach correctly. For example, the teacher

should not spend an excessive amount of time on the I Do (demonstration) step to the

detriment of the We Do and You Do steps. After demonstrating the skill (I Do), the teacher

should have the students demonstrate the target skill together with him/her at the same time,

providing cues or hints or help for the students if they get stuck (We Do). Finally, the teacher

should give students the opportunity to practice the skill on their own (You Do). For activities

that do not use this particular approach, the coach refers to the teacher’s guide for the steps

that the teacher is supposed to follow, to see if the teacher needs additional support in

scaffolding the learning experience for students.

4. Communication: Did the teacher communicate clearly and correctly with the students? That is, did the teacher give clear and correct explanations and instructions using expressive language tailored to the students’ level of understanding, supported when necessary by gestures, visual aids, and other comprehension scaffolds?

To communicate clearly with the students, the teacher needs to use language that the

students understand and to supplement that language with expressive non-verbal cues. The

coach observers whether the teacher is speaking clearly, loudly, and slowly enough for the

students to understand; using vocabulary and sentence structures that the students are

likely to recognize; and using facial expressions, intonation, gestures, visual aids, and other

cues to reinforce what s/he is saying. The coach also observes the students carefully for

24 Pearson & Gallagher, 1983


signs that they are following what the teacher is saying. For example, are they paying

attention and engaged? Do they respond appropriately to questions and follow the teacher’s

instructions? The coach notes whether the teacher needs additional support in

communicating with students in a way that promotes learning.

5. Monitoring: Did the teacher monitor students’ understanding throughout the lesson? For example, did the teacher watch and listen closely to the students to monitor their attention, engagement, and responses, adjusting his or her instruction when necessary? Did s/he walk around the room and check the students’ work as they worked in groups, pairs, or independently?

Checking students’ understanding throughout the lesson helps teachers adjust instruction,

provide constructive feedback to students, and differentiate instruction according to students’

needs. The coach observes whether and how the teacher is monitoring the students’

responses to instruction and adjusting instruction appropriately to help all students master

the skills being taught.

6. Feedback: Did the teacher consistently provide constructive feedback to students? For example, did the teacher affirm correct responses and flag incorrect responses for correction or re-teaching when necessary to clear up confusion?

For students to learn to read, they need to know what they have done well, what they need

to improve, and how they can improve. Students rely on teacher feedback to know whether

they are on the right track or not. If a student’s contribution is correct, the teacher should

affirm it explicitly. If it is incorrect, the teacher should either gently correct it, have the student

or another student correct it, or give further instruction to clear up the confusion. Teacher

feedback is not only important in whole class instruction; when students are working

independently or in pairs, the teacher should circulate throughout the room and comment

constructively on their work. The coach observes whether the teacher is giving adequate and

appropriate feedback to all student contributions.

7. Pacing: Did the teacher teach at an appropriate pace? That is, did she or he spend an appropriate amount of time on each activity (i.e., close to the time suggested in the teacher guide, unless extenuating circumstances warranted more or less), keeping the pace quick enough to maintain the students’ interest and cover the lesson components but not so fast as to compromise their understanding?

Teaching at a pace that is not too fast or slow helps the teacher cover all the lesson content

and ensures that students understand what is being taught. A perky pace also helps to

maintain students’ attention and hold their interest. The Read Liberia teacher’s guide

includes suggested time allocations for each activity in the daily lesson. Ideally, the teacher

should adhere to these suggested times, though some variation is permissible. The coach

observes whether the teacher’s pacing of the lesson components is appropriate and

balanced.

8. Inclusion: Did the teacher direct his/her attention to and encourage active participation from all students, including girls and boys, students of different abilities and needs, and students seated in different parts of the room?

Read Liberia is committed to inclusive education at all levels. In instruction, a teacher

practices inclusion by attending to all students equitably according to their needs. The coach

observes whether the teacher pays attention to, speaks to, and calls on both boys and girls,

students of different abilities (low performers as well as high performers, students with

disabilities, etc.), and students seated in the different parts of the room. When students are

working independently or in pairs, the teacher should circulate to all parts of the room to give

attention to all students as much as time permits. The coach observes whether the teacher


needs additional support in ensuring that all boys and girls of different backgrounds and

abilities are included in the learning process.

9. Positive Discipline: Did the teacher maintain an orderly and affirmative environment where every student felt respected, valued, safe, and encouraged to boldly pursue their full potential?

In order to maximize learning, students need to feel safe, respected, and valued in their

classroom community. The coach observes the teacher’s classroom management and

demeanor toward the students to see whether s/he addresses them in a positive and

respectful way, affirming them, encouraging them, and bolstering their confidence, even

when they make mistakes. The coach also observes the students’ reactions to the teacher to

see whether they seem comfortable in the teacher’s presence, or fearful, eager to try new

skills, or hesitant. The coach also observes whether the students treat one another with

respect. All these aspects help the coach know whether the teacher needs additional

support in learning how to manage student behavior in constructive ways.

10. Homework: Did the teacher check and assign homework?

Assigning homework gives students additional practice on what was taught in class.

Checking homework helps students know what was done well and what can improve. The

Read Liberia teacher’s guide includes a homework assignment for every lesson. The coach

observes whether the teacher assigns and explains the homework of the day at the end of

the lesson, as well as whether the teacher checks that the students have completed the

homework assignment from the previous day.

Due to the nature of the kindergarten lesson, the coach observation form for KG also

contains the following elements in addition to the ones above:

• Teaching Aids: Did the teacher use additional teaching aids (i.e. in addition to the

alphabet chart and letter cards) to support student learning?

• Extending Conversation: Did the teacher extend conversation through questioning

and other strategies indicated in the teacher guide?

• Responding: Did the teacher actively listen and consistently respond to children’s

attempts to communicate and extend conversation when appropriate? Did the

teacher give adequate “wait time” between asking questions allowing children to

respond?

• Facilitating small groups: Did the teacher effectively facilitate small group

instruction?

• Classroom climate: Overall, is the learning environment warm and engaging? Did

the teacher interact with the children in a positive and nurturing manner? For

example, did the teacher greet each child, call children by name, look children in the

eye, engage children in meaningful interactions?

• Vocabulary: Did the teacher introduce and/or review the weekly vocabulary words

as described in the Teachers Guide?

Rating the observation

At the end of the observation, the coach adds up the number of YES and PARTIALLY

scores and puts this number in the bottom box under each column. The coach calculates a

total overall score by assigning two points for each YES score and one point for each

PARTIALLY score; NO scores earn zero points. The coach writes the total number of points

earned (over a total possible 20 in G1-G2, and 26 in KG) in the bottom box. The lesson


observation score helps the coach calculate the teacher’s “risk category.” The scores

correspond to the following risk categories (see Exhibit 3):

Exhibit 3. Classroom Observation Scores and Risk Categories

Risk Category G1-G2 Score (out of 20

possible points)

KG Score (out of 26

possible points)

No Risk 19-20 points 24-26 points

Low Risk 16-18 points 18-23 points

Some Risk 13-15 points 13-17 points

High Risk 0-12 points 0-12 points

“No Risk” and “Low Risk” teachers are progressing well, and the coach can continue his/her

support as is. For “Some Risk” and “High Risk” teachers, the coach should consider what

additional support s/he can provide them. The coach can also seek advice from the coach

supervisor for how to help teachers who continue to struggle despite sustained support from

the coach. Furthermore, coaches can easily compare “scores” for individual teachers from

one visit to the next to track improvement.

Coach-teacher conference to provide lesson feedback

Giving teachers descriptive, actionable feedback is a critical part of the coaching process.25

Following the classroom observation, the Read Liberia coach and the teacher meet for a

private conference to reflect together on the teacher’s practices and student progress. This

conference forms the crux of the coach and teacher’s collaborative relationship. If a positive

rapport between the coach and teacher is properly developed and maintained, the

conference is an opportunity for the teacher to actively pursue his or her own growth,

bolstered by the coach’s technical expertise and moral support.26

General strategies that the coach uses to build rapport and maximize the teacher’s learning

experience during the conference include the following:

• Consistently eliciting the teacher’s input first before offering his or her own thoughts

(that is, coaches should listen as much as they talk);

• Asking the teacher open-ended questions, such as “What do you think about….?”,

“How do you see…?”, “Why did you choose to…?”, and “Tell me more about …”;

• Placing student learning at the center of the coaching conversation (e.g. “What did

the students do well? In what areas are students struggling the most?”);

• Listening carefully to everything the teacher says and asking for clarification if it is not

clear;

• Demonstrating respect for the teacher’s knowledge, experience, and point of view;

• Providing actionable and relevant instructional strategies that respond to students’

needs and build the teacher’s confidence in his or her ability to improve learning;

• Deepening the teacher’s technical understanding of how children learn to read;

• Following up on recommendations and goals from the previous visit; and

25 Scheeler et al., 2004 26 Collet, 2012; Heineke, 2013; Joyce & Showers, 2002; Richardson, 1994; Schon, 1987.


• Always affirming the teachers’ strengths, improvements, and commitment to their

students’ learning.

During the conference, the coach and teacher discuss and fill out the second part of the

Read Liberia classroom observation form together. The conference protocol guides them to

focus on the following five aspects.

Key aspects for discussion during the coach-teacher conference:

1. Strengths of today’s lesson

The conference begins by focusing on the positive. Emphasizing the positive helps to

motivate the teacher and focus on the desired practices instead of on problems or

weaknesses. It is also important for the coach to acknowledge and affirm the teacher’s

existing and growing expertise. The coach invites the teacher to reflect on what went well

during lesson delivery. If necessary, the coach may prompt the teacher with questions for

further reflection, such as “What did you do to prepare the lesson before class that you think

helped the lesson to go better?” / “What part of today’s lesson do you think was the most

successful?” / “What was one moment in today’s lesson when you felt that the students were

understanding and responding well?”.

The coach listens carefully to what the teacher says and affirms positive practices. The

coach also mentions any additional positive aspects that s/he observed that the teacher may

have forgotten to mention or may not have been aware of doing, referring in particular to any

practice marked YES on the first page of the observation form.

2. Implementation of recommendations/goals from the previous visit

At the end of the previous conference with the teacher, the coach will have recommended

actions that the teacher can take to improve her or his practice, and the teacher will have

also set his or her own goals for improvement. After highlighting the positive aspects of the

current lesson, the coach looks back at the notes from the previous conference and reminds

the teacher of the recommendations and goals set at that time. The coach asks the teacher

to share his or her perspective on how well s/he feels s/he has applied the recommendations

and met the goals in the interim. The coach listens carefully to what the teacher says and

affirms all positive practices and improvements, encouraging the teacher to keep up the

good work. If the teacher has not implemented a prior recommendation or taken steps

toward meeting a goal, the coach seeks to identify with the teacher what the obstacles to

doing so may be (e.g. confusion or lack of confidence about implementing, lack of time,

challenges with classroom management, etc.). The coach and the teacher then discuss

possible strategies for overcoming any obstacles they identify.

3. Student learning outcomes: strengths and needs

All teachers want to succeed in helping their students to learn well. Assessment data reveal

what students have learned well, what they have begun learning but have not yet fully

mastered, and what they have yet to acquire. The Read Liberia teacher has multiple sources

of formative and summative data on the students’ learning progress, from informal

observations in class, daily checks, weekly check-ups, periodic assessments, and the

coach’s own spot checks (see below). The coach and teacher use part of their conference

time together to examine and analyze these data, identifying areas of student strengths

(such as what are the students generally good at and where are they making good

progress?) as well as areas of student need (such as what are the students generally

struggling with and where do they need more support?). These analyses guide the teacher

to keep doing what is working well and to reteach, reinforce, or differentiate instruction to

meet the students’ remaining needs. The coach’s aim in this process is to help the teacher

make appropriate connections between his or her teaching practices and students’


outcomes.

4. Coach recommendations on priority areas for teacher improvement

As noted above, at the end of the conference the coach identifies one to two priority

recommendations based on the current visit for how the teacher can improve her or his

practice. In formulating his or her recommendations, the coach may refer to any teacher’s

practices marked as PARTIALLY or NO during the classroom observation as well as the

discussion on students’ needs identified through the analysis of student learning data. The

coach may also continue with a recommendation from a previous visit that has not yet been

mastered. When sharing the recommendations with the teacher, the coach gives the teacher

the opportunity to ask questions, weigh in with his or her own opinion, and agree to work on

the areas that the coach has identified.

5. Teacher goals

Because the Read Liberia coaching model ultimately aims to help teachers develop into

reflective practitioners and lifelong learners, it is important for teachers to have agency in

their own professional growth from the beginning. At the end of the conference, the coach

invites the teacher to select one or two of his or her own goals to target for improvement.

These goals may be similar to or different from the coach’s recommendations. What matters

is that they come from the teacher’s own priorities for his or her growth.

At the end of the coaching session, the coach enters the data from the classroom

observation form into the tablet. Once the coach has saved an electronic record of the

session, s/he leaves the hard copy form with the teacher for future reference. In this way,

both the coach and the teacher share the same record of the teacher’s ongoing progress.

The lesson observation and post-observation conference with the teacher are arguably the

most important activities that the Read Liberia coach completes during the monthly school

visit. Additional high-leverage coaching practices that Read Liberia coaches conduct include

modeling a lesson, co-teaching a lesson with the teacher, and conducting student reading

spot checks. These activities are described briefly below. The coach also has interactions

with other members of the school and community, which will be detailed in the next section.

Lesson modeling and co-teaching

If the coach has noticed a teacher’s struggling with a particular kind of lesson in the past, or

if the coach and the teacher have discussed a particular lesson difficulty during one of their

conferences, a coach may prepare a model lesson ahead of an upcoming visit. If possible,

the selection and scheduling of the model lesson should be done in consultation with the

teacher. The coach should practice ahead of time to be fluent with the delivery. The teacher

introduces the coach to the students as their guest teacher and explains that the coach is

going to teach part of their lesson that day. As the coach teaches, the teacher observes all

aspects of the lesson delivery, including the instructional model, interactions and feedback

with the students, and informal assessment. After the lesson, the coach and teacher discuss

the teacher’s observations, questions, and key takeaways from the model lesson during their

private conference.

The coach’s lesson modeling must be conducted with sensitivity to the impact on the teacher

and students. The purpose of modeling is not to minimize or undermine the role of the

teacher or to criticize the teacher’s practice. While students usually react positively to guest

teachers, the students must see the coach and teacher as colleagues working together as a

team.

Alternatively, a coach may choose to model a lesson or part of a lesson in private with just

the teacher during their conference. While this method does not allow the teacher to observe


the coach’s interactions with the students, it can nonetheless be an efficient way to build the

teacher’s understanding of and confidence in executing a part of a lesson that has been

challenging for him/her. In addition, the coach does not necessarily need to prepare this kind

of lesson modeling in advance; a skilled coach can observe a teacher’s difficulty with that

lesson during the observation and then go back over it with the teacher on the spot during

the conference. Another advantage to this method is that it prevents the teacher from

becoming too dependent on the coach to teach for him/her and allows the coach to see what

the teacher is capable of doing him/herself during the actual lesson time with the students.

In addition to lesson modeling, co-teaching is another scaffold that coaches can use to help

teachers practice new methods and materials. Prior to co-teaching, the teacher and coach

plan and prepare a lesson together. Through this process they focus on key aspects of

lesson delivery such as executing specific instructional strategies, pacing, transitioning from

one activity to the next, managing the materials, and checking for student understanding.

If a coach has not planned ahead of time

to model or co-teach a lesson in front of

the students, the coach stays quiet during

the lesson observation and just observes

the teacher teaching. The coach takes

notes on the classroom observation form

to discuss with the teacher afterwards

during the conference. If the teacher is

getting significantly off track during the

lesson, the coach may discreetly whisper

guidance in his or her ear. If the teacher

feels overwhelmed or lost, s/he may invite

the coach to step in and model that part

of the lesson on the spot. The teacher

can do this with little disturbance just by

signaling to the students that the coach is

going to continue with the next part.

When the coach and teacher have a trusting, collaborative relationship, and the students see

them as a team, the coach can exercise the greatest degree of flexible support depending

on the teacher’s evolving needs from one lesson to the next.

Student reading spot checks

Analyzing student assessment data for strengths and weaknesses and making connections

between these outcomes and the teacher’s practices, is one component of the coach-

teacher conference, as described above. Read Liberia teachers conduct formative and

summative assessments as part of their normal instructional routines. Approximately once

every other month, the Read Liberia coach also conducts a spot check of G1 and G2

students’ reading levels to complement the regular assessments administered by the

teachers. The coach selects four students (two boys and two girls) at random and

administers a brief, individual oral reading assessment. The coach first puts the students at

ease and asks them to just read aloud as best as they can and to skip any words that they

do not know. The assessment measures the students’ oral reading fluency rate and

comprehension of a short, grade-level passage. The coach records the results directly in the

tablet.

The primary purpose of this activity is to further inform the coach’s and teacher’s

understanding of the students’ progress. The coach and teacher compare the results of

these spot checks to the teacher’s own assessment results and see how they match or

Coach whispering guidance to a teacher during a lesson.


differ. For example, do the students who performed well on the coach’s spot check also

perform well on the teacher’s assessments in class? If there is a mismatch in the results, the

coach and teacher can discuss why that might be. The coach and teacher can use the

reading spot checks to discuss whether the students seem to be reading at, below, or above

the level where they are supposed to be, as well as whether the students appear to be

improving or stagnating over time. Most importantly, they discuss concrete steps that the

teacher can take to address any student weaknesses revealed in the assessment data.

Training Sessions

While the Read Liberia coaches’ most frequent and regular contact with the teachers comes

through the monthly school visits, Read Liberia teachers also attend in-service trainings

twice a year, a residential training in August and a cluster-based refresher training in

February. Read Liberia master trainers facilitate the August training with logistical assistance

from the coaches. With support from the master trainers, the Read Liberia coaches

themselves lead the refresher training sessions in February for their cluster in a location,

often a school, close to where their cluster schools are located. Cluster trainings offer

several important benefits. Coaches are able to work with small groups of teachers. Without

the added expense of lodging, cluster trainings are more economical than residential

trainings. Transportation time and costs are also minimized.

The purpose of the refresher trainings is to deepen teachers’ mastery of reading pedagogy,

and specifically using the Read Liberia lesson plans and materials, and to strengthen areas

in which coaches have found teachers to be struggling throughout the year. During these

trainings, teachers benefit from the exchange of experiences and ideas as they practice the

lessons together, give one another feedback and support, and strategize together to

overcome challenges.

Coach-School-Community Engagement

While the Read Liberia coaches’ primary relationship is with their teachers, their

engagement is not limited to only teachers. Effective support necessitates engaging the

larger system within which teachers operate.27 At the school level, Read Liberia coaches

meet with school administrators (principal and instructional vice principal) at every visit. They

also encourage the operation of Teacher Circles, which are open to all teachers (not just the

KG-G2 teachers that the coaches support). At the district level, coaches meet with the

District Education Officer (DEO) on a regular basis. Read Liberia coaches also serve as a

general advocate for literacy with the PTA and in the community, to promote school-home

connections and a culture of reading.

Teacher Circles

One way for teachers to continue to receive support and grow professionally between coach

visits is for them to offer one another peer-to-peer support in groups, or “teacher circles.”

Teachers can benefit tremendously from meeting regularly with their colleagues from the

same school (or a neighboring school). Because they are at the same hierarchical level and

face the same daily challenges, teachers may feel more comfortable leaning on and learning

from one another than they do with others. For example, they can rotate observing one

another’s lessons, share constructive feedback and teaching tips, and discuss with one

another problems or questions they have with their lesson implementation, their students’

27 L’Allier, Elish-Piper, & Bean, 2010; Printy, 2008


learning or behavior, or other challenges, all in a low-stakes, collaborative environment.

When they face challenges that they cannot resolve on their own, they can bring their

questions and concerns back to the coach for more help.

The Read Liberia coach works with the teachers and school administrators to strongly

encourage and facilitate this type of peer-to-peer support. Specifically, the coach supports

the formation, maintenance, and effectiveness of teacher circles by helping teachers to

organize groups and plan meeting times, protocols, and agendas; by facilitating an initial

meeting until the teachers are ready to take over; and checking in regularly with the group

members at each site visit to get feedback on how the teacher circles are going.

Principals and Instructional Vice Principals

Principals and vice principals are the key players charged with supervising and supporting

teachers on-site at all times and at multiple levels. The support of these school

administrators for an initiative such as early grade reading resonates among the teachers.

Their advocacy becomes a resource for teachers and facilitates the sustainability of the

initiative. It is therefore essential that the coach liaise with them to create a unified web of

support. At each school visit, the coach meets with the principal and instructional vice

principal to check in, communicate upcoming events, and address any questions the

administrators may have about Read Liberia and related activities. The coach also updates

the administrators on teacher and student progress, alerts them to any needs or concerns,

and offers guidance on how they can reinforce positive teacher practices in between

coaching visits.

Between school visits, the coaches continue to check in with their teachers, principals, and

vice-principals by phone and/or SMS at least once a week to follow up on any issues

discussed at the previous visit. Read Liberia staff check with the coaches through SMS or

Facebook Messenger, which the coaches also use to communicate, when possible, with

teachers.

To introduce them to Read Liberia’s early grade reading approach, the Activity invited

participating school principals and instructional vice principals to take part in the August

2018 residential training. Going forward, for greater cost-efficiency, specific, intensive

training sessions for school administrators are planned. Read Liberia also provides a set of

all teacher training manuals and materials to each school administration, to keep these

actors apprised as key stakeholders in early grade education.

Principals and instructional vice principals are also welcome to observe cluster teacher

training sessions, to further prepare them to work together with coaches in support of

teachers.

District Education Officers

The Read Liberia coaching program will be more successful the more it is integrated into

existing MOE structures. To prepare DEOs for Read Liberia’s interventions, the Activity

invited them to participate in the August 2018 residential training. A few DEOs even

presented lessons for the group of coaches. Read Liberia provides each DEO with the

training manuals and materials to keep them apprised as key stakeholders in early grade

education. In later years of the activity, intensive training sessions specifically for DEO

personnel will support transfer of the coaching function to the Ministry of Education.

The Read Liberia coach also pursues open lines of communication with the DEO. The coach

holds a monthly debrief with the DEO to maintain an ongoing dialogue with him/her around

the teachers’ progress and the students’ literacy achievement. To support this debrief, the

coach fills out and shares with the DEO the Monthly Coach Support Tracker (Appendix C),


which summarizes the data from his or her monthly visits in a succinct way. The tracker

includes individual data about each school visit and lesson observation, as well as

aggregated data about teachers’ strengths and needs and the coach’s action plan for

continued support.

The coach also shares the site visit schedule for the upcoming month and invites the DEO to

accompany her or him on at least two school visits per semester. These visits give the DEO

direct exposure to what is happening at the school level around literacy development, to

which the DEO can lend his or her support. Both the school visits and monthly coach

updates help the DEO to keep the higher echelons of the MOE informed of the realities on

the ground. The DEO is also welcome to observe cluster teacher training sessions led by the

coach.

Community

Read Liberia coaches function as general advocates for literacy in the community at large.

As such, they participate in local education conferences and workshops, community

outreach events, PTA meetings, and other interactions with the education sector and the

broader public whenever possible. The coaches coordinate with and serve as a technical

resource for the Social Mobilizers under the Read Liberia Community Engagement program,

providing technical guidance and support to community activities that promote a culture of

reading.

Accountability Measures

Ensuring accountability of the coach function is essential for quality assurance, cost control,

and overall management of their work. Read Liberia has trained coach supervisors,

developed a set of instruments for planning, managing and recording coaches’ activities, and

uses digital technology to support rapid communication between Activity supervisors and

coaches in the field. These accountability measures are described in turn below.

Coach Supervisors

Every Read Liberia coach reports directly to a Read Liberia Coordinator for Teacher Training

and Coaching (CTTC), or “coach supervisor” for short. The coach supervisor serves both as

an accountability structure as well as a resource and a guide to help the coaches

successfully carry out all their duties.

It is important to note that coaching itself is a skill that is honed over time, and coaches need

support in their own professional development as coaches. The coach supervisors support

the coaches in several ways. First, just as the coaches observe their teachers teaching and

conference with them afterwards to discuss their practices and spur growth, so too the coach

supervisors observe the coaches in action and meet with them afterwards to reinforce the

quality of their coaching practices. Once a month the coach supervisor accompanies each of

the coaches under his or her supervision on a school visit and observes the coach executing

activities during that visit, including the classroom observation, teacher conference, any

lesson modeling or co-teaching, any student spot checks, and meetings with the principal

and vice principal. At the end of the visit, the coach supervisor meets with the coach

privately, and together they discuss what went well during the visit and what might possibly

be done better. This is an opportunity for the coach supervisor to affirm the coach’s positive

practices, offer an outsider perspective on the coach-teacher rapport, and help the coach

trouble-shoot problems and improve the effectiveness of his or her support.


In addition, at least once a month, possibly at the same time as the joint school visit, the

coach and coach supervisor hold a monthly debrief about all the schools that the coach

supports. This debrief is based on the same Monthly Coach Support Tracker that the coach

presents to the DEO (Appendix C). This debrief is an opportunity for the coach supervisor to

help the coach analyze the general trends that s/he is encountering in the field, both the

teachers’ improvements and challenges, as well as strategize about concrete next steps that

s/he can take to meet the teachers’ ongoing needs. It is also an opportunity for the coach to

identify and communicate his or her own needs to the supervisor, e.g. needs for guidance,

clarification, resources, etc.

The coach supervisors also provide logistical support to the coaches. They work with the

coaches to plan the monthly coach workplan, school visit schedule, and transportation

budget for the upcoming month, ensuring that each school receives at least one visit per

month while school is in session. The coach supervisors ensure that coaches have all the

materials that they need, including tablets in good working order, copies of all the coach

documents (see below), training materials, and materials for the schools, e.g., books, oral

reading fluency assessments, report cards, etc. Through daily communication via phone or

text, coach supervisors ensure that coaches are following the workplan, schedule, and

budget and help them troubleshoot and adjust plans when necessary. The coach

supervisors receive and process all the coaches’ completed documentation of activities.

Communication and Documentation

As previously mentioned, Read Liberia coaches play an extensive and varied role in

facilitating communication among the stakeholders in early grade reading. They visit each

school monthly to support their teachers on site and touch base with the school

administrators. Between visits, they phone or text their teachers and school administrators

weekly to check in and follow up on issues raised during their previous visits. They visit their

DEO monthly as well, to keep the MOE informed about the general trends observed across

their schools. They liaise with the Read Liberia Social Mobilizers to promote literacy through

community events. They phone or text their coach supervisor daily to communicate timely

updates concerning all their activities and issues encountered.

The coaches also contribute valuable data for program monitoring. Because they are the

representatives of Read Liberia who visit the schools most frequently, they are the best

positioned to inform the activity about what is happening on the ground. Twice a year, they

fill out a school census noting the enrollment, attendance, inventory of Read Liberia

materials, number of minutes allocated to reading instruction per week, and PTA activities.

From their regular monthly school visits, the coaches record data on teacher performance as

part of their teacher support protocol. The coaches also collect learning outcome data

through the student reading spot checks and, informally, follow the functioning of the teacher

circles through a review of the meeting minutes and conversations with teacher circle

members.

In the execution of their responsibilities, Read Liberia coaches leave a trail of documentation

for different purposes. Some of these documents are central to their pedagogical role, such

as the classroom observation form, student reading spot checks, and monthly coach tracker.

The others are necessary for human resources, operational, and financial management.

A summary listing of the main coach documents, several of them already described or

referred to in previous sections, follows.

The Classroom Observation Instrument (Appendices A and B) documents teacher

performance and professional growth. The coach first fills the form in hard copy then

enters the data in the coach tablet. The hard copy remains with the teacher.


The Read Liberia School Census records data on enrollment, attendance, number

of minutes of reading instruction scheduled each week, presence of Read Liberia

materials, and PTA activity. These data are entered directly in the tablet twice a year.

The Student Reading Spot Checks document a random sample of student learning

outcomes. The spot checks are administered on the tablet.

The Daily Coach Activity Log documents all the coach’s work-related activities,

including both travel and non-travel workdays. These data are entered in the tablet.

The Travel and Transportation Tracker documents all the coach’s authorized,

work-related travel, including school visits, DEO visits, trips to the regional office,

community events, etc., regardless of whether transportation expenses were incurred

or not. The coaches fill this form in hard copy and submit it to the coach supervisors.

Moreover, the data from the classroom observation instrument go into an online dashboard

for use by coach supervisors and activity staff to keep track of the schools and teachers

visited and student enrollment and attendance. Read Liberia staff and RTI home office staff

can access the data captured in electronic and hard copy formats to report to the MOE and

USAID and to analyze and inform future training topics.

Technology

Read Liberia’s use of electronic tablets as noted above, provided through a Google grant,

facilitates accountability by supporting communication and documentation. Using the tablet,

the coach can capture observation data, assessment information, details of school visits,

and the schools’ GPS coordinates. These data provide valuable and timely information

which informs Read Liberia’s activities and confirms the coach’s interaction with the schools

for accountability purposes.

In addition to the tablets, Read Liberia uses mobile phone services among coaches,

teachers, and Activity management, both for communications check-ins and for mobile

money reimbursement of confirmed expenses. Over time, the use of communications

technology can produce cost savings, as coaches can communicate with teachers in remote

areas when they are unable to travel to their schools, and coaches and supervisors can

communicate daily without incurring travel costs.

Considerations for Sustainability

Sustainability and cost effectiveness go hand in hand. If the coaching model is too expensive to implement, then the MOE will be unable to sustain it. Building on the foundation laid during the Activity’s first year, Read Liberia, in collaboration with the MOE, devised the most cost-effective coaching model that could be sustained by the Ministry. Ideally, the Activity would have trained MOE personnel as coaches to support teachers from the start. However, after evaluating the existing situation, Read Liberia, in collaboration with the MOE, opted to engage external coaches while building the capacity of MOE specialists to deliver a sound coaching program. While this approach is more costly initially, the data collected (including cost data) and technical capacity being built will progressively provide the MOE with the information and capacity needed to replicate and extend the model at lower cost while preserving its key features. After considering all approaches, Read Liberia ascertained that this approach was the most cost effective, i.e., the most efficient approach for attaining the goal of providing support to teachers. To ensure the MOE could sustain a cost-effective coaching program, Read Liberia agreed with the Ministry to train 24 MOE specialists to be master trainers who would, in turn, train the coaches engaged by the Activity, thus facilitating


sustainability of efforts. Additionally, Read Liberia would also train CEOs and DEOs to support early grade reading initiatives in schools as well as principals to deliver school-based support, all efforts contributing to sustainability. With a trained cadre of staff at the central, DEO, CEO, and school levels, the Ministry is poised to continue to offer a quality coaching model.

Engaging and Progressively Developing MOE Technical Capacity

Over the course of Read Liberia, the Activity is building the capacity of system actors so that

they can carry out and sustain the coaching function to support quality instruction in

emerging literacy and basic reading skills, a subject area which has not received much

attention in the national education framework.

Read Liberia engaged and trained 24 master trainers, who were employees of the MOE, to

prepare the external coaches during initial training sessions in February and August 2018.

The master trainers will continue to support the training of coaches, DEOs, and school

administrators in subsequent trainings planned for these actors. Through this work, the

master trainers constitute a cadre of MOE personnel who are developing sound knowledge

and understanding of the coaching model and of early grade reading best practices, and the

skills to train other system actors in effective coaching and reading instruction practices.

The initial training events held by Read Liberia in 2018 introduced not just teachers but also

school principals, vice principals, and DEOs to sound instructional practices in early grade

reading. The regular contact of Read Liberia coaches with all of these actors over the

months of the program is also giving DEOs and school administrators the opportunity to see

the coaching model in action and ways to support quality instruction in emerging literacy and

basic reading skills. In trainings specifically designed for them going forward, school

administrators and DEO staff will further develop their own knowledge and skills in using the

model to coach and support teachers.

Continuing Use of Resources Developed Through Read Liberia

The systems, tools, and resources developed by Read Liberia can be used by the MOE after

the Activity ends.

The training manuals, scripted lessons, and early grade readers that Read Liberia has

developed support and complement the Liberian national curriculum. They do not lengthen

the curriculum with additional content that teachers must deliver, but rather, offer child-

centered activities to facilitate the teaching and learning of basic reading skills. These

materials were designed so that they will continue to be useful even if the curriculum were to

change.

The instruments that Read Liberia coaches use to observe teachers and assess student

performance have been designed for ease of administration and on-the-spot basic analysis.

As such, they can be readily transferred for use by school and district administrators in

providing individualized, structured support and feedback to teachers on their delivery of

early grade reading instruction.

Read Liberia’s coaches themselves, while external to the MOE, constitute an important,

trained and experienced resource for the system. They could be mobilized as needed to

provide guidance, training and support to MOE during extension of the coaching function to

other counties, districts and schools.

Choosing Cost-Effective Strategies

Training and supporting teachers in new instructional methods can be a costly business. For Read Liberia, the key costs of implementing its coaching model have included:


• development of instruments, training materials, and accountability measures

• initial training and ongoing skill development of coaches

• coach supervisors’ labor, transportation for supervisory visits, and communications costs

• coaches’ labor, transportation to schools, and communications costs;

• teachers’ residential training (lodging, transportation, materials, and meals for trainers and participants)

• teachers’ cluster-based training (transportation, materials, and refreshment for teachers).

The first point, development of instruments, materials, and accountability measures represents an investment which is expected to have only minor ongoing costs for adjustment, revision and updating. These elements are shared progressively with MOE actors at county, district and school levels, and can be transferred entirely to MOE without further development cost. The training and skill development of coaching personnel will continue to be needed as the system expands to other districts and schools, and to ensure that coaches’ knowledge and skills are refreshed and current. Ways to minimize costs going forward include arranging training venues closer to the location of participants (applying the “cluster” approach to the training of coaches where possible, to reduce transportation and lodging costs), mobilizing exemplary Read Liberia coaches on a short-term basis to augment the ranks of experienced trainers during training campaigns, and providing more of the training and support to coaches using virtual conferences, voice-over presentations, and video of exemplary coaching and instructional practices. The labor of coaches currently constitutes a substantial recurring cost for Read Liberia. These costs can be lessened as the coaching model is integrated into the system, by incorporating aspects of the coaching function into the formal roles of school principals, vice principals, and DEOs, and equipping these actors with the necessary skills, tools and knowledge to carry out these functions in their own schools and districts. Read Liberia will be training these actors and conducting discussions with MOE to support these kinds of measures as part of capacity transfer in the later years of the Activity. Similarly, the coaching supervisor function could be incorporated into CEO staff responsibilities, with accompanying training and tools provided to existing promising but underutilized staff. Whether some new positions will need to be created (at some additional cost), or existing positions and staff reoriented (at little to no additional cost), will be addressed in discussion with MOE. To the degree that the coaching function can be assumed primarily by school administrators, the costs of coaches’ transportation to schools can also be greatly reduced, if not eliminated entirely. There is value in teachers’ continued engagement with a familiar but otherwise external partner (such as the DEO) in the coaching process at the school level. For this reason, some provision enabling DEOs trained as coaches to visit schools on a quarterly or termly basis is recommended, to bring a comparative perspective and complement the more regular coaching work of school administrators. The continuation of local teacher circles and frequent communications between coach and teacher through mobile phone voice and messaging services will also provide support, feedback, and transmission of information at low cost. When formal training of teachers is called for, the objectives of training and the modality of training selected interact to produce its cost-effectiveness. Lengthy residential in-service training, once the norm, can be particularly expensive, as it entails not only the labor of trainers and provision of materials, but also transportation, lodging and feeding of participants throughout the training process. In terms of results, the cost-effectiveness of this


model of teacher capacity development on its own has been called into question. Once teachers return to their schools and classrooms, often very different from the training setting, it is far too easy to slip back into the old familiar practices. To introduce wholly new concepts or methods, residential training may be an appropriate choice. But a residential training’s real and perceived advantages (uniformity of training delivery, organizational control and convenience, undivided attention of participants) must be weighed against its high cost and its conceptual (as well as physical) distance from teachers’ day-to-day experience in classrooms. Even when it is an appropriate choice, the potential participant attention advantage of residential training has been found to offer diminishing returns if the training lasts longer than five consecutive days. With such considerations in mind, Read Liberia has selected to limit residential training of teachers to one five-day session each year starting in Year 2, for the presentation of new concepts, strategies and materials. Teacher capacity development focused on skills-strengthening, knowledge-deepening, and more individualized attention, on the other hand, is carried out through cluster-based training (at less than half the cost per participant than residential training) and on-site follow-up through the coaching visits. The ongoing support is provided by locally situated coaches who are able to work with teachers in their own settings, and build an active, evolving relationship with each teacher and a better understanding of his or her strengths and challenges. Through this relationship and understanding, coaches can provide support that is individualized to each teacher’s needs and progress over time and take into consideration each school’s specific context. Studies suggest that this kind of approach is more effective than formal training alone in helping teachers change the way they teach and boost children’s learning.28 Cost-conscious consideration of the appropriate modalities of training delivery and their trade-offs will similarly be critical going forward for sustainability.

Conclusion The Read Liberia coaching model is built on an extensive literature base of effective

coaching practices. The model takes a balanced approach between directive and reflective

coaching. Directive coaching is helpful for teachers in the Liberian context, many of whom

are learning best practices for reading instruction for the first time. Reflective coaching

supports the long-term goal to develop a corps of teachers who have agency in their own

professional growth. For Read Liberia, the coach-teacher relationship is central, and

establishing a positive, trusting rapport is critical to opening the teacher’s mindset to

learning. To that end, Read Liberia seeks coaches with both classroom teaching experience

and technical expertise but also recognizes the importance of soft skills such as the ability to

communicate effectively, build relationships with many kinds of people, learn and adapt

quickly, and faithfully carry out one’s duties with integrity.

Read Liberia coaches’ primary activity is to visit their teachers at their schools on a regular

basis throughout the school year. The Read Liberia coach visit protocol is structured around

a number of evidence-based, high-leverage coaching practices, including lesson

observation, conferencing, lesson modeling or co-teaching, and examination of student

learning data. The lesson observation focuses on key teaching practices that are applicable

to any lesson content. The coach-teacher conference is structured to promote active teacher

reflection, analysis, and goal-setting, with gentle guidance by the coach. The coach also

engages the larger school, district, and community system through his or her regular

communication with school administrators, the DEO, and community stakeholders. The

28 De Alba-Johnson et al., 2004; Neuman & Cunningham, 2009; Tschannen-Moran & McMaster, 2009


Read Liberia coaches are supported both professionally and logistically by their coach

supervisors.

Because the research base behind the potential impact of regular and sustained

pedagogical coaching is so strong, Read Liberia expects that once its coaching model is

firmly established, it will lead to improved teacher practices and student learning outcomes.


References Bean, R. M. (2014). The power of coaching: Improving early grade reading instruction in

developing countries: Final report. Report produced for the United States Agency for International Development. Silver Spring, MD: Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. Retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00JV67.pdf

Bean, R. M., Draper, J. A., Hall, V., Vandermolen, J., & Zigmond, N. (2010). Coaches and coaching in reading first schools. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1086/653471

Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A., and Dexter, E. (2010). Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 7–34. https://doi.org/10.1086/653468

Bruns, B., Costa, L., and Cunha, N. (2018). Through the looking glass: Can classroom observation and coaching improve teacher performance in Brazil? Economics of Education Review, 64, 214-250.

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., and Rocko, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2593-2632.

Cilliers, J., Fleisch, B., Prinsloox, C., and Taylor, S. (2018). How to Improve Teaching Practice? Experimental Comparison of Centralized Training and In-classroom Coaching. Retrieved from https://www.riseprogramme.org/sites/www.riseprogramme.org/files/publications/RISE_WP-024_Cilliers_TeachingPractice.pdf

Collet, V. S. (2012). The gradual increase of responsibility model: Coaching for teacher change. Literacy Research and Instruction, 51(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2010.549548

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy and evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8, 1–44. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000

De Alba-Johnson, N. F., Rodriguez, M., Arias, L., Johnson, C. Z., McConnell, S., McEvoy, M., Horst, K., & Passe, A. (2004, April). Is professional training enough? The effect of coaching in the practice of early literacy instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, California. Retrieved from http://edmeasurement.net/research/coaching.pdf

Duffy, F. M. (2003). I think; therefore, I am resistant to change. Journal of Staff Development, 24(Winter), 30–36.

Elish-Piper, L., and L’Allier, S. K. (2011). Examining the relationship between literacy coaching and student reading gains in grades K–3. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1086/660685

Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED521219.pdf

Harden, K., Pflepsen, A., & King, S. (2018). Relationships between coach support and teachers’ adoption of new instructional practices: Findings from the Nigeria Reading and Access Research Activity (RARA). IN Pouezevara, S. (Ed). Cultivating dynamic educators: Case studies in teacher behavior change in Africa and Asia. Research Triangle Park: RTI Press.

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00JV67.pdf

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/653471

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/653468

https://www.riseprogramme.org/sites/www.riseprogramme.org/files/publications/RISE_WP-024_Cilliers_TeachingPractice.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2010.549548

http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000

http://edmeasurement.net/research/coaching.pdf

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/660685

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED521219.pdf


Harris, D. N., and Sass, T. R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 798–812. https://doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.009

Heineke, S. (2013). Coaching discourse: Supporting teachers’ professional learning. The Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1086/668767

Hussain, R., and Ali, S. (2010). Improving public school teachers in Pakistan: Challenges and opportunities. Improving Schools, 13(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480209352404

International Literacy Association. (2004). The role and qualifications of the reading coach in the United States [4-page brochure]. Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from http://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/reading-coach-position-statement.pdf?sf

Ippolito, J. (2010). Three ways that literacy coaches balance responsive and directive relationships with teachers. Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 164–190. https://doi.org/10.1086/653474

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86, 945–980. doi:10.3102/0034654315626800

Kise, J. A. G. (2006). Differentiated coaching: A framework for helping teachers change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., and Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547-588.

Kretlow, A. G., and Bartholomew, C. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406410371643

L’Allier, S. K., Elish-Piper, L., & Bean, R. M. (2010). What matters for elementary literacy coaching? Guiding principles for instructional improvement and student achievement. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 544–554. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.7.2

Majerowicz, S., and Montero, R. (2018). Can teaching be taught? Experimental evidence from a teacher coaching program in Peru. Retrieved from https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/smajerowicz/files/majerowicz_latest_jmp.pdf

Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., Lockwood, J. R., Martorell, F., Gershwin, D., Naftel, S., . . . Crego, A. (2008). Supporting literacy across the Sunshine State: A study of Florida middle school reading coaches. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

McCombs, J. S., & Marsh, J. A. (2009). Lessons for boosting the effectiveness of reading coaches. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 501–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000710

McKenna, M. C. A., & Walpole, S. (2008). The literacy coaching challenge: Models and methods for grades K-8. New York: Guilford Press.

National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET). (2012). Beyond “job-embedded”: Ensuring that good professional development gets results. Santa Monica, CA: NIET. Retrieved from http://www.niet.org/assets/PDFs/beyond_job_embedded_professional_development.pdf

https://doi.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.009

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/668767

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1365480209352404

http://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/reading-coach-position-statement.pdf?sf

https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406410371643

http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.7.2

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/smajerowicz/files/majerowicz_latest_jmp.pdf

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000710

http://www.niet.org/assets/PDFs/beyond_job_embedded_professional_development.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1086/653474


Neuman, S., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 532–566. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208328088

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317-344.

Perkins, S. J. (1998). On becoming a peer coach: Practices, identities, and beliefs of inexperienced coaches. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 13(3), 235–254.

Piper, B., & Mugenda, A. (2013). The Primary Math and Reading (PRIMR) Initiative: Midterm impact evaluation. Prepared under the USAID Education Data for Decision Making (EdData II) project, Task Order No. AID-623-M-11-00001 (RTI Task 13). RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC. Retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pdacy060.pdf

Piper, B., and Zuilkowski, S. S. (2015). Teacher coaching in Kenya: Examining instructional support in public and nonformal schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.001

Pouezevara, S., Costello, M., & Banda, O. (2012). Malawi teacher development support. Malawi reading intervention early grade reading assessment – final assessment. Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development under the Malawi Teacher Professional Development Support (MTPDS) project, Contract No. EDH-1-00-05-00026-02. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00JQJ4.pdf

Printy, S. (2008). Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 187–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07312958

Ross, J. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effects of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 17(1), 51–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1495395Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023005005

Sailors, M., Hoffman, J. V., Pearson, P. D., McClung, N. Shin, J., Phiri, L. M., and Saka, T. (2014). Supporting change in literacy instruction in Malawi. Reading Research Quarterly, 49(2), 209-231.

Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., and McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27 (4), 396-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700407

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shidler, L. (2009). The impact of time spent coaching for teacher efficacy on student achievement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(5), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0298-4

Stover, K., Kissel, B., Haag, K., & Shoniker, R. (2011). Differentiated coaching: Fostering reflection with teachers. The Reading Teacher, 64(7), 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.64.7.3

Snyder, P. A., Hemmeter, M. L., & Fox, L. (2015). Supporting implementation of evidence-based practices through practice-based coaching. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35(3), 133–143.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0002831208328088

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.001

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00JQJ4.pdf

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07312958

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1495395

https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023005005

https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700407

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0298-4

http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RT.64.7.3

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pdacy060.pdf


Tolley, L. M., Johnson, L., and Koszalka, T. A. (2012). An intervention study of instructional methods and student engagement in large classes in Thailand. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.05.003

Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy: Four professional development formats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new teaching strategy. The Elementary School Journal, 110(2), 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1086/605771

Walpole, S., McKenna, M., Uribe-Zarain, X., and Lamitina, D. (2010). The relationships between coaching and instruction in the primary grades. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 115–140. https://doi.org/10.1086/653472

Wolpert-Gawron, Heather. The Many Roles of an Instructional Coach. ASCD Online Journal,

June 2016.

Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007—No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.

Zigmond, N., Bean, R., Kloo, A., & Brydon, M. (2010). Policy, research, and Reading First. In A. McGill-Franzen, R. L. Allington, G. Hruby, J. Elkins, P. Johnston, S. J. Samuels, S. Hupp, V. Risko, P. Anders, W. Rupley, & V. L. Wilson (Eds.), Handbook of reading

disability research (pp. 464–476). New York: Routledge Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.05.003

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/605771

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/653472

---------------------------- -------

------------ -------------

---- ----

---- ----

----

Read Liberia Grade I - 2 Classroom Observation InstrumentUSAID

A. GENERAL INFORMATION

Date: __ I __ I__ Coach/Observer Name: ______________________

School Name: School Code:

County: ___________ District: Town:

Teacher Name': _________________ Teacher ID: ________ Teacher Gender. M I F

Grade: I 12 Lesson Week: ____ Lesson Day: ____

Number of students currently enrolled in the class: Girls: ____ Boys: Total:

Number of students present at the beginning of the lesson: Girls: ____ Boys: TotaI:

Number of books used by students during today's lesson: SAB: Let's Read:

Lesson Start Time: ____ Lesson End Time: ____

B. LESSON OBSERVATION

I. Preparation: Did the teacher show evidence of having prepared for this lesson before starting to teach it? For example, didthe teacher seem familiar with the lesson plao, write YES PARTIALLY NO lesson notes, and prepare the necessmy materials (e.g., letter cards, realia for vocabulary words, or text on chalkboard) ahead oftime?

2. Content Did the teacher cover the components for the day's lesson as indicated in the teacher guide, including sufficient time for students to read YES PARTIALLY NO aloud?

3. Method: Did the teacher use an effective instructional approach (e.g., "I Do YES PARTIALLY NO

We Do - You Do") as indicated in the teacher l!Uide? 4. Communication: Did the teacher communicate clearly and correctly with the

students? That is, did the teacher give clear and correct explanations and instructions using expcessive language tailored to the students' level ofunderstanding, supported when necessary by gestures, visual

YES PARTIALLY NO

aids. and other com!Jrehension scaffiJlds?

5. Monitoring: Did the teacher monitor the students' understanding throughout the lesson? for example, did the teacher watch and listen closely to the students to monitor their attention, engagement, and responses, adjusting his or her instruction when necessary? Did she or .~e walk

YES PARTIALLY NO

around the room and check the students' work as they worl<ed in )!rDu!Js, pairs, or independentiy?

6. Feedback: Did the teacher consistently provide constructive feedback to students? For example, did the teacher affirm correct responses and ffag incorrect responses fi:Jr YES PARTIALLY NO correction or re-i.eachin2" when necessarv to clear Ub confusion?

7. Pacing: Did the teacher teach at an appropriate pace? That is, did she or he spend an appropriate amount oftime on each activity (i.e., dose to the time suggested in the teacher guide, unless YES PARTIALLY NO extenuating drcumstances warrarrt.ed more or fess), keeping the pace quJck enough to maintain th12 students' interest and cover the lesson components but notso fast as to compromise their understandin)!?

8. Inclusion: Did the teacher direct his/her attention to and encourage active participation from all types of students, including boys and girls, students of YES PARTIALLY NO different abilities and needs, and students seated in different parts of the room?

9. Positive Discipline: Did the teacher maintain an orderly and affirmative environment where every student felt respected, valued, safe, and encouraged YES PARTIALLY NO to boldly pursue their full potential1

I0. Homework: Did the teacher check and assign homework? YES PARTIALLY NO

Total number for each column: /20p~Calculate: 2 p<>ints for each YES+ I point for each PARTIALLY+ 0 p<>ints for each NO

"

Tick the risk category based on the observation score: D 19-20 points: No Risk D 16-18 points: Low Risk D B-15 points: Some Risk I D 0-12 points: High Risk

Continue support as is Additional training/support required

1 Teacher privacy will be protected. Only relevant project staff (e.g. coaching super"Visors, M &E officers) will have access to the teacher' s identifiable data. Such data will be removed in any dissemination to a wider audience.

Appendix A. Classroom Observation Instrument for Grades 1 and 2

Read Liberia Activity Coaching Model -A 1

C. OBSERVATION SUMMARY

I. Strengths of today's lesson first ask the teacher to identifY what she or he considers the strengths in todoy's lesson. Then, add any additional observations ofyour own.

2. Implementation of recommendations/goals from previous visit Refer to your notes on recornnendations (Or actions or improvement and teacher goa~ discussed ot the previous visit Together with the teacher, identif( how these were addressed in IDday's lesson, If at all. lfd1ls Is die lnlt!al observation, then proceed to #3.

3. Student learning outcomes: strengths and needs Discuss with the teacher the swdentl' current learning progress based on the (earring objectives for wd<>(s lesson, your observation ofthe studentl during today's lesso~ the teachet's ongoing observations and assessments, and your student spot check resultl. Together identif( areas ofstudent strengths and needs and discuss strategies (O r addressing those needs.

Date of most recent assessment __ I __ I__ Were report cards disseminated at the most recent marking period? a. MOE Primary Report Card: [g_Yes D No b. Supplementary Student Reading Report I D Yes D No Card (for Periods 2, 4, and 6 only): LQ_Not applicable

c. PTA/Community Reading Report Card D Yes D No (for Periods 2, 4, and 6 only): D Not applicable

4. Coach recommendations on priority actions or 5. Teacher goals areas for teacher improvement Ask the teacher to identif( I to 2 specipc areas that she or he wants to fows on

Based on your observation oftoday's lesson and analysis ofstudent need~ improving In future lessons. (These may or m"( not be the same areas listed In

ldentif( I to 2 priority actions that the teacher can take to address student #4.) Ust the teachers responses here.

needs or areas that you recommend the teacher target for improvement

Teache r Comme nts:

Teacher Name and Signature:------------------------------ Date:_ I_ I_

Principal Name and Signature:------------------------------ Date:_I_I _

Coach Name and Signature:------------------------------- Date:_ I_ I_

Read Liberia Activity Coaching Model A-2

------------------------- -------

@ Read Liberia Kindergarten Classroom Observation Instrument

USAID

A. GENERAL INFORMATION

Coach/Observer Name: __________________Da~=~-1 ~-1~

School Name: School Code:

_ To'Wn: ____________County:---------- District: __________

Teacher Name: _____________ Teacher ID: _______ Teacher Gender: MI F

Week Num her: ____ Day: ____

Num her of students currently enrolled in the class: Girls: Boys: Total:

Num her of students present at the beginning of the lesson: Girls: ___ Boys: Total:

Lesson Start Time: ____ Lesson End Time: _____

B. LESSON OBSERVATION

I. Preparation: Did the teacher show evidence of having prepared for the day's activities 1 For example, did the teacher shaw evidence ofhaving read through the day's lesson beforehand?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

2. Content: Did the teacher cover the components for the day's lesson as indicated in the teacher guide? That is, did the teacher implement the introduction, whole qrou!Jfsmall qroulJ. condusion activities?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

3. Pacing: Did the teacher teach at an appropriate pace? That is, did sfhe spend an appropriate amount oftime on each activity (i.e. dose to the time suggested in the teacher's guide, unless extenuating circumstances warranted more ar less), keeping the pace quid< enough to maintain the students' interest and cover the lesson com!Jonents but not so fast as to comt>romise their undemandin!!?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

4. Inclusion: Did the teacher direct his/her attention to and encourage active participation from all students, including boys and girls, students of different abilities and needs, and students in different parts of the room?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

5. Positive Discipline: Did the teacher maintain an orderly and affirmative environment where students feels respected, valued, safe, and encouraged to boldly pursue their full potential?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

6. Teaching Aids: Did the teacher use additional teaching aids (i.e. in addition to the alphabet chart and letter cards) to support student learnin21

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

7. Monitoring: Did the teacher monitor the students' understanding throughout the lesson? For example, did the teacher observe and listen closely to the students to monitar their attention, engagement, and responses, adjusting his/her instructian when necessary? Did the teacher scaffold and/or extend conversations to better !!aU!!e student undemandin!!?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

8. Feedback: Did the teacher consistently provide constructive feedback to students? For example, did the teacher affirm correa responses and flag incorrea respanses for correctian re-teachin!! when necessarv to dear U!J contusian?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

Appendix B. Classroom Observation Instrument for Kindergarten

Read Liberia Activity Coaching Model B-1

9. Extending Conversation: Did the teacher extend conversation as through questioning and other strategies indicated in the teacher guide? For example, questioninsr throul[h prompts, teacher ti(Js, small srroup facilitation, etc.?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

10. Responding: Did the teacher actively listen and consistently respond to children's attempts to communicate and extend conversation when appropriate? Did teacher give adequate "wait time" in between asking questions and resoondinl! to children!

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

11 . Facilitating small groups: Does the teacher effectively facilitate small group instruction?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

12. Classroom climate: Overall, is the learning environment warm and engaging? Does the teacher interact with the children positive and nurturing manner? For example, did the teacher child (i.e. greet each child, call children by name, and look them in t/1e eve, ensrasre children in meaninl!(ul interactions?

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

13. Vocabulary: Does the teacher introduce and/or review the weekly vocabulary words as described in the Teachers Guide!

YES PARTIALLY NO

NOTES:

Total number for each column: Calculate: 2 points for each YES + I point for each PARTIALLY + 0 points for each NO

=

I n•~~ Tick the risk category based on the observation score:

D 24-26 points: No Risk ) D 18-23 points: Low Risk D 13-17 points: Some Risk D 0-12 points: High Risk -~-

Continue support as is Additional training/support required

C. OBSERVATION SUMMARY

Summary of day's language activities by coach:


I. Strengths of today's lesson Firs( ask the teacher to identlfY what slhe considers the strengths in todcry's lesson Then, odd any additional observations ofyour own.

2. How were previous recommendations/goals implemented? Refer to your notes on recorrmendotions for improvement and teacher goals discussed

ot the pr.Wous visit Together v.ith the teacher, identlfY how these

were addressed in todcry's lesson, ifot all. If this is the initlol obsetvotion, then proceed to #3.

3. Student learning outcomes: strengths and needs Discuss with the teacher the students' current learning progress based on your obsetvatlon ofthe students during today's lesson, and the teacher's ongoing observadons and fonnatlve assessment strotegie. Togetl1er, identlfY areas ofstudent strengths and needs. (Did you ~I like the students understand xi Teocher response could Include justificadons.) Discuss strategies for addressing those needs.

4. Coach recommendations on priority areas for S. Teacher goals teacher improvement Ask the teacher to ldentifY I to 2 specific areas that she or lie wonts to focus

Based on your obsewatlon oftoday's lesson and analysis ofstudent need~ on improving In filture lessom. (These mC>f or may not be the some areas listed

identifY 1-2 priority areas that you recommend the teacher target for In #4.) Ust the teacher's responses here.

improvement

6. Does the teacher have any questions about implementing a future lesson? What type of feedback was given?

Teacher Comments:

Teacher Name and Signature:-----------------------------Date:_ I_ I_

Principal Name and Signature: ------------------------------ Date: _ I _ I_

Coach Name and Signature: ------------------------------- Date: _ I _ I_


----Read Liberia

USAID Monthly Coach Support Tracker

CoachName: ________________________________~Month/Year. __________

County: ________________________District: ----------------------

A. VISIT LOG

Dato of visit

School name School EMIS code

Teacher name Teacher ID

Te acher >ex

Grado Student: book ratio (# of students present:# of books in use)

Tcad1cr lesson observation scoren o

Stude nt a ttc ndMco ra te (# of students present + # enrolled) Gi.rk I Boys I All

#ol minulm: of reading irn;truction oer~ck

Principal Signature

M I F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 111 2 : I I MI F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 1112 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I M I F KG 11 12 : I I M l F KG 11 12 : I I

OVERALL AVERAGE: I I

B. AGGREGATED VISIT DATA Number of schools visited this month: Number of schools not visited this month: -----

Number of teachers visited this month: N umber of teachers not visited this month: ----

Number/percentage of observed teachers scor ing as "Some" or "High" Risk

on the Classroom Observation: ----~---~~

C. SUMMARY OF ISSUES

Comments on Visit Data:

I. Generallzed strengths Thor ~. when ore most teachers doing well or Wnprovi'ig on the most?

2. Generallzed needs That is, \vf1ot ore common problems rhot the teochcrs ore hcMng or recurring areas rolitlCd fOr improvement?

3. Action Plan That is, what speci(K. ad.ions wi#yoo take to address yoor teachers' needs?

4. Coach needs That is, what arem do you need more help with?

5. Additional Comments

Coach Name and Signature.: _____________________ Dace: __ I __ I__ District Education Officer Name and Signature: Dace: __ I __ I__

Teacher Training and Coaching Supervisor Name and Signature: Date: __ I __ I__

Appendix C. Monthly Coach Support Tracker

Read Liberia Activity Coaching Model C-1

read liberia activity - united states agency for

Documents