Improving Literacy Outcomes: Supporting Middle School General Educators With AIM Coaching

• In Event: Preparing General Education Teachers to Promote Justice and Equity for Students With Disabilities

Abstract

Objective

In 2019, 27% of 8th graders could not perform at a level of basic mastery (U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2019). Because all students, including students with disabilities (SWDs), spend most of their day in the general education setting (Newman, 2006), it is essential that general education teachers are equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to provide content-area literacy instruction that includes many opportunities for students to learn from text with co-occurring explicit literacy instruction (Kamil et al., 2008).
We first describe an observation study conducted to document middle school general education teachers’ use of explicit instruction (e.g., modeling) and literacy practices. Next, we describe the AIM Coaching Package, an innovative coaching model developed in response to the observation study findings. The AIM Coaching Package includes (a) an adaptive coaching intervention and (b) accompanying coaching PD. Literacy coaches are taught to use teacher skill and will data to differentiate support to improve teachers’ fidelity of implementation of an evidence-based set of vocabulary and comprehension practices, Promoting Adolescents’ Comprehension of Text (PACT; Vaughn et al., 2015).
Theoretical Framework
In our observation study, we drew on the theoretical framework of cognitive load reduction instruction (Martin, 2016; Mayer 2003) to develop a coding instrument that captures teachers’ use of explicit instruction and literacy practices. This framework suggests that students’ literacy development is best facilitated by scaffolding the cognitive load placed on struggling readers during instruction. Teachers can support students’ cognitive load via evidence-based explicit literacy instruction (Kamil et al., 2008; Archer & Hughes, 2011). AIM Coaching is based on Desimone’s (2009) PD framework that includes five characteristics of effective PD (e.g., active learning opportunities).
Methods and Data Sources

We aimed to build on previous observation literature (e.g., Swanson et al., 2015), by observing both explicit instruction and text-based literacy practices via 69 observations of content-area instruction provided by 23 teachers in two middle schools. We used a partial interval time sampling procedure to capture data relevant to our research questions. In the subsequent year, we developed, implemented, and evaluated usability and feasibility, and then refined the AIM Coaching Package with significant involvement from instructional leaders (n = 13) and teachers (n = 22).
Results

Findings suggest that teachers underutilize both explicit instruction and text-based literacy instruction. For example, we observed teachers providing a model in less than one third of lessons, and we observed teachers preparing students to read a text (e.g., providing background knowledge) in only 13% of lessons. More often, teachers either expected students to access a text with no related explicit literacy instruction, or they used literacy practices in ways that were not explicit or not linked to a text. These findings informed development of AIM Coaching.
Scholarly Significance

Findings suggest that general education teachers miss opportunities to implement evidence-based explicit literacy instruction, instruction that can improve outcomes for SWDs. This highlights the need for innovative inservice PD (e.g., adaptive coaching models) that can support teachers’ school-wide adoption, implementation, and sustainability of evidence-based explicit literacy instruction.

Authors

• Jade Wexler, University of Maryland
  Presenting Author

• Alexandra Shelton, Johns Hopkins University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Kristabel Stark, University of Vermont
  Non-Presenting Author