"Coach" can mean many things: five categories of literacy coaches in Reading First

By Theresa Deussen, Tracy L. Coskie, LeAnne K. Robinson, E. Autio. 2007

187 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/82339188ba370c15dacd73f74d015dedb9453472

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Reading Coaches and the Relationship Between Policy and Practice (2012, background): “Additionally, coaches provide general assistance to the school principal and work directly with children (Bean et al., 2010; Deussen et al., 2007; Marsh et al., 2010).”
Focusing on Teacher Learning Opportunities to Identify Potentially Productive Coaching Activities (2017, unknown): “professional development, teacher learning, content-focused coaching, teacher leadership Draper, Hall, Vandermolen, & Zigmond, 2010; Deussen et al., 2007).”
Rethinking Instructional Leadership, a Review (2013, background): “The district may influence who is qualified to be a coach (Frost & Bean, 2006; Roller, 2006), how the job is defined or interpreted (Deussen et al., 2007), and the level of support provided to the coach and to the principal in supporting the coach (Camburn et al.”
The Transition from Experienced Teacher to Mathematics Coach: Establishing a New Identity (2010, background): “For example, Deussen et al. (2007) found that coaches spent 36% of their time on tasks such as planning for and attending meetings, attending professional development, completing paperwork, and doing other duties (e.g., bus duty).”
Examining the Relationship between Literacy Coaching and Student Reading Gains in Grades K–3 (2011, methodology): “Because literacy coaches spend their time engaged in so many different activities (Deussen et al., 2007), researchers have sought to determine how literacy coaches spend their time by gathering data using varied approaches such as surveys (e.g., Deussen et al., 2007), diaries (e.g., Bean et al.,…”
How the Framing of Instructional Coaching as a Lever for Systemic or Individual Reform Influences the Enactment of Coaching (2015, background): “Other studies indicate that coaches spend relatively little time working with teachers, reporting percentages as low as 28% (Deussen et al., 2007) and 35.7% (Bean et al., 2010) on average.”
Critical features of effective coaching for early childhood educators: a review of empirical research literature (2019, background): “There is wide variation, however, in which teaching practices and children’s outcomes coaching targets, what coaching actually entails, and how much is provided (Deussen et al. 2007, Sandefur et al. 2010, Wasik and Hindman 2010, Wasik et al. 2013, Schachter 2015).”
Three Ways That Literacy Coaches Balance Responsive and Directive Relationships with Teachers (2010, methodology): “Differences between responsive and directive coaching stances have been noted in a subset of the coaching literature (Borman & Feger, 2006; Deussen et al., 2007; Killion, 2008; McKenna & Walpole, 2008; Smith, 2007; Steiner & Kowal, 2007; Toll, 2005, 2007; Veenman & Denessen, 2001).”
A Description of Instructional Coaching and its Relationship to Consultation (2009, methodology): “The data-oriented coaches in this study (Deussen et al., 2007) spent only an average of 18% of their time on in-classroom activities traditionally associated with coaching (e.”
Instructional Coaching as High-Quality Professional Development (2017, background): “Though many different forms of coaching exist (Deussen et al., 2007; Neumerski, 2012), we argue that the conceptual foundation of the model embodies content focus, active learning, coherence, and collective participation in ways that meaningfully bolster teacher and student learning.”