Gauging the Institutionalization of Instructional Coaching in Charter Management Organizations and Public School Districts

• In Event: Conditions for Advancing Coaching as a Reform Lever for Systemic Instructional Change

Abstract

Coaching opens classroom doors, disrupting teaching’s long-standing norms of individualism and privatism (Little, 1990; Lortie, 1975). In many contexts, coaching remains a counternormative strategy and may not be fully leveraged towards instructional reform (Author). However, charter management organizations (CMO) and public school districts (PSD) currently rely on coaching to build the capacity of teachers and improve achievement. To what extent is coaching integrated into CMOs and PSDs? What are the mechanisms by which coaching gained legitimacy in these systems? To address these questions, this paper uses concepts from organizational sociology to investigate the institutionalization of coaching in CMOs and PSDs.

Institutionalization provides lenses to analyze whether and how an institution, such as coaching, ‘sticks’ (Scott, 2001). Institutionalization can be shallow or deep—with gradations of collective understandings and routinized practices (Colyvas & Jonsson, 2011). Organizational conditions, actors, and artifacts shape institutionalization as a process and outcome (Colyvas & Powell, 2006).

This paper utilizes data from a qualitative study of coaching in two CMOs (Stratosphere CMO; Vault CMO) and two PSDs (East District; North District) that included interviews with coaches and administrators (n= 28 interviews), document analysis (n≈ 30 documents), and observations. These two types of educational systems differ in their governance, infrastructure for instructional improvement, and position in the policy environment (Wohlstetter, et al., 2015) and offer potent contrasts for this study. I engaged in comparative analysis of the structures, actors, and practices furthering the institutionalization of coaching (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

My findings assess legitimacy and taken for grantedness of coaching in four systems. Coaching tended to have a higher degree of legitimacy in the CMOs; a Stratosphere principal declared: “in the charter world, coaching teachers is the holy grail.” As principals’ and teachers’ understanding of coaching deepened, it garnered legitimacy. More specifically, they perceived coaching to be both appropriate and desirable, and this facilitated certain aspects of coaches’ work.

Additionally, there were differences in coaching’s taken for grantedness. More specifically, coaching was integrated into actors’ conceptualizations and routines to varying degrees across CMOs and PSDs. For instance, a Vault coach declared that coaching is: “so ingrained in culture that we don't even really think about it. It's woven into the fabric of everything and has been from day one.” In contrast, several North District coaches mentioned that their work had a lower degree of taken for grantedness, necessitating that they continually remind teachers about the goals and activities of coaching. These points shed light on differences in the degree to which coaching was integrated into each system’s conceptions and routines.

By discussing the structures, actors, and activities raising the legitimacy and taken for grantedness of coaching in two CMOs and two PSDs, this paper contributes to policy research. Specifically, it illuminates the organizational factors bolstering coaching as a reform lever. Policymakers and practitioners can use these findings to design, implement, and scale-up coaching which benefits schools and students. Finally, this paper offers theoretical contributions on leaders’ roles in institutionalization processes.


 

Author

• Sarah L. Woulfin, University of Connecticut