TY - JOUR
T1 - Reconsidering Resistance and Challenges
T2 - Teacher Agency During Joint Instructional Inquiry with Literacy Coaches
AU - Robertson, Dana A.
AU - Breckenridge Padesky, Lauren
AU - Thrailkill, Laurie “Darian”
AU - Frahm, Tia
AU - Brock, Cynthia H.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The College Reading Association.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - This qualitative study examined coach-teacher interactions among eight teachers, one administrator, and three university-based coaches in one rural elementary school. Framed within a theory of agency, we examined videos of coaching interactions as coaches and teachers debriefed and co-planned vocabulary instructional ideas stemming from a yearlong, schoolwide professional learning opportunity. We found that teachers’ agentive actions (i.e. intentionality, autonomy, reflectivity, efficacy doubt, principled resistance) were in response coaches’ talk that elicited reflection, sought clarification, expanded on instructional suggestions, and affirmed teachers’ contributions to coaching conversations. We also found that teachers’ challenges or resistance to presented vocabulary principles and literacy practices were not always acknowledged or taken up by the coaches. We conclude that reconsidering how and why teachers resist coaching suggestions might inform how we support and prepare coaches to work with teachers in ways that value and trust their individual contributions and prompt them to act agentively toward continuous improvement.
AB - This qualitative study examined coach-teacher interactions among eight teachers, one administrator, and three university-based coaches in one rural elementary school. Framed within a theory of agency, we examined videos of coaching interactions as coaches and teachers debriefed and co-planned vocabulary instructional ideas stemming from a yearlong, schoolwide professional learning opportunity. We found that teachers’ agentive actions (i.e. intentionality, autonomy, reflectivity, efficacy doubt, principled resistance) were in response coaches’ talk that elicited reflection, sought clarification, expanded on instructional suggestions, and affirmed teachers’ contributions to coaching conversations. We also found that teachers’ challenges or resistance to presented vocabulary principles and literacy practices were not always acknowledged or taken up by the coaches. We conclude that reconsidering how and why teachers resist coaching suggestions might inform how we support and prepare coaches to work with teachers in ways that value and trust their individual contributions and prompt them to act agentively toward continuous improvement.
KW - Coaching
KW - coach-teacher interactions
KW - literacy
KW - professional learning
KW - teacher agency
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85159710929&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85159710929&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/19388071.2023.2208177
DO - 10.1080/19388071.2023.2208177
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85159710929
SN - 1938-8071
VL - 63
SP - 238
EP - 256
JO - Literacy Research and Instruction
JF - Literacy Research and Instruction
IS - 3
ER -