Evaluation Project Proposal: Teacher Coaching Program

Business Challenge

The first three years of teaching has been referred to as the survival years. Currently, the most popular form of training is through teacher in-service. This method has its advantages. A school district can introduce material over pedagogy and classroom management to hundreds of teachers within a few weeks. It requires a few veteran teachers to present for the in-service and it is very efficient. Although new teachers are exposed to current teaching strategies during the in-service, teachers develop the skills on the job. Evaluations are not conducted after the in-service to determine if the skills were acquired from the in-service or from trial and error on the job. Teaching, like many other skills, cannot be taught strictly through lecture or from a book. Gaining new skills is a different type of learning than mastering content. Therefore, it demands a different delivery method than classroom instruction. New educators require coaching just like athletes. An athlete can learn the rules and strategy of a game from the book but needs coaching to become an invaluable team member. Sports are dynamic. No two games are ever the same and athletes can only prepare for the games but they cannot foresee every action that will be made. Sports are so dynamic because it is interactive. A developing educator requires coaching as well. Classrooms are dynamic because students and teachers interact rather than function independently in their own world in shared space. Educators can plan but they cannot anticipate every event. Even though on-the-job coaching seems ideal, teachers work in isolation and attempt to implement what they have learned during in-service without guidance.

At present, almost 25% leave in the first three years (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, and Wyckoff, 2008) and over 50% of teachers leave the profession within five years (Lambert, 2006). Student achievement affects teacher attrition rates, especially during the first year (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, and Wyckoff, 2008). In a study of New York City schools, teachers identified as less effective had higher attrition rates than more effective teachers in low and high achieving schools (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, and Wyckoff, 2008). This is not to say that all less effective teachers drop out of the profession. Less effective teachers that leave the profession may have other options outside of education to explore. Teachers with a stronger academic background or stronger qualifications are more likely to leave (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, and Wyckoff, 2008). It can lead one to believe that there is an exodus of less effective but qualified teachers which will leave the less effective and less qualified behind.  The impact of this trend can affect schools on multiple levels. First, schools need to retain teachers so they can make gains on their effectiveness. A school without veteran teachers will have no one to guide the new cohort of educators. Second, a school that is a revolving door for new teachers creates an environment of instability within the organization and for its students. It will erode group cohesion and interruptions in instruction will lower student achievement.