Three Ways That Literacy Coaches Balance Responsive and Directive Relationships with Teachers

By Jacy Ippolito. The Elementary school journal, 2010

136 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Information Systems and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9eadfc9447307b78e53da58c70b7a41cbea2000

How researchers see this paper

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

In Education

In Information Systems and Management

Citations in the corpus

Rethinking Instructional Leadership, a Review (2013, background): “For example, there is considerable literature on whether coaches should be directive—assuming an explicit, assertive role—or responsive—emphasizing teacher self-reflection, or if a balanced approach between the two is best (Burkins, 2007; Ippolito, 2010).”
Reading Coaches and the Relationship Between Policy and Practice (2012, background): “For example, Ippolito (2010) documented reading coaches' efforts to balance what she called responsive relationships (in which coaches respond to teachers' needs) with what she called directive relationships (in which coaches are assertive about what approaches teachers should do).”
The Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence (2018, background): “For example, “responsive” coaching aims to help teachers reflect on their practice, while “directive” coaching is oriented around the direct feedback coaches provide to strengthen teachers’ instructional practices (Ippolito, 2010).”
Coaching Discourse (2013, background): “In order to better understand the processes of coaching, a limited number of studies included actual observations of one-on-one coaching interactions (e.g., Coburn & Woulfin, 2012; Heineke, 2010; Ippolito, 2010; Kinnucan-Welsch, Rosemary, & Grogan, 2006; Nowak, 2003; Rainville, 2007; Smith, 2007; St”
How the Framing of Instructional Coaching as a Lever for Systemic or Individual Reform Influences the Enactment of Coaching (2015, background): “Thus, coaches were “responsive,” facilitating individual change and principals were “directive,” facilitating system-wide change (Ippolito, 2010).”
Instructional Coaching as High-Quality Professional Development (2017, background): “To accomplish this goal, coaches tend to assume a directive, explicit stance, rather than a responsive stance, which allows teachers to take the lead on the practices he or she works on based on their reflections of their performance (Deussen et al., 2007; Ippolito, 2010).”