is critical work for teacher educators because more nuanced noticing creates opportunities for similarly nuanced instructional decisions. In this article, I offer a coaching innovation, side-by-side coaching, which positions a coach for live
Courtney Baker, Melinda C. Knapp and Terrie Galanti
Here is support for coaches who work in diverse contexts to integrate high-leverage teaching and coaching practices with specific attention to mathematics content.
Lynsey K. Gibbons, Melinda C. Knapp and Teresa Lind
Why is it so crucial that coaches and teachers concentrate their interactions on students' mathematical reasoning?
Courtney Baker and Melinda Knapp
More than ever, mathematics coaches are being called on to support teachers in developing effective classroom practices. Coaching that influences professional growth of teachers is best accomplished when mathematics coaches are supported to develop knowledge related to the work of coaching. This article details the implementation of the Decision-Making Protocol for Mathematics Coaching (DMPMC) across 3 cases. The DMPMC is a framework that brings together potentially productive coaching activities (Gibbons & Cobb, 2017) and the research-based Mathematics Teaching Practices (MTPs) in Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All (NCTM, 2014) and aims to support mathematics coaches to purposefully plan coaching interactions. The findings suggest the DMPMC supported mathematics coaches as they worked with classroom teachers while also providing much-needed professional development that enhanced their coaching practice.
In addition to differentiating and developing curriculum, this teacher's transition to coaching in an early childhood setting involves a complex blend of mentoring teachers, teaching students, and discovering resources.
Theresa M. Ray
Improving or expanding teaching skills requires hard work in which professional dialogue can he an indispensable tool (Joyce 1988). Educators are presented with a challenge in implementing the NCTM's Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (1989). One way to implement the Standards in curriculum development and instruction is through cognitive coaching, a process that requires professional dialogue and can be a vehicle for change (Garmston. Linder, and Whitaker 1993; Sparks 1990). This article explains a project that used the process of cognitive coaching to implement the Standards and describes my own experience as a participant in the project. It is my hope that readers will make connections with their colleagues and be encouraged to put theory into practice in their own classrooms.
Mary Alice Carlson, Ruth Heaton and Molly Williams
In recent years, teacher noticing of children's mathematical thinking has emerged as an important and generative construct in mathematics education (Sherin, Jacobs, & Philipp, 2011). Less is known about ways instructional leaders notice teachers' learning. Between 2011 and 2015, we facilitated professional development (PD) in which coaches, principals, and teachers studied mathematics teaching and learning together. Our initial focus on teacher decision-making was inadequate in meeting instructional leaders' learning needs. We adapted the PD to focus instructional leaders' attention on the work of learning teaching. Analysis of leaders' discourse revealed shifts from noticing teacher characteristics to noticing dilemmas and decision-making within teaching and coaching. Findings suggest new roles for teacher educators and new forms of PD for instructional leaders.
With the increasing use of standardized tests in the schools and the pressures on educators to improve the standing of classes, schools, and districts, a new defensive strategy has emerged for improving standardized test scores—coaching for the tests. The popular use of the term coaching means training students for specific types of questions and information required by a specific standardized test. This kind of training has become widespread in classrooms and among students nationwide.
Mathcounts is a nationwide competition for seventh- and eighth- grade students. NCTM participated in developing the MATHCOUNTS materials and is one of five major sponsors. The Editorial Panel of the Mathematics Teacher felt that an interview with Joan Armistead, the coach of the team to win highest honors in the first year of the competition, would be interesting to readers.
Recently educators have been beset by complaints from parents and businesses—and the news media has run related stories—that educational standards are falling. In partial response to these complaints and stories, some states now demand, as a condition for a high school diploma, a passing score on a standardized elementary mathematical competency test. The introduction of these tests could represent a positive step in the present reform movement in mathematics education—but only if the tests are integrated into the overall framework of that movement. A recent incident in my local school system suggests that a competency test can actually undercut the reform movement if the test is allowed to impose its own reference frame. The discussion that follows derives from that specific incident, but I believe it applies, in principle, to the handling of any standardized test imposed solely to establish a minimum competency requirement. Broader spectrum, multilevel instruments, such as the New York State Regents Examination, raise more complex issues that cannot be addressed here.