Reading Time: 4 minutes

One of the greatest privileges in my professional life has been the opportunity to learn the discipline of professional learning in education from highly respected researchers who advanced not just the field of professional development (PD) but the broader sphere of educational reform. Beverly Showers, a widely published and internationally recognized researcher, shaped my growth as an educator and supported the design of a comprehensive state-wide system of professional development in Iowa.  Our work together resulted in dissemination of multiple state publications and the delivery of workshops across the state on how to implement and sustain the Iowa Professional Development Model (IPDM).  Bev concluded from her own research and her knowledge of PD literature that teachers can “acquire new knowledge and skill and use it in their instructional practice when provided with adequate opportunities to learn”[1].

The work that Bev and I did along with a highly committed group of Iowa stakeholders was based on the following principles about professional development:

“Where knowledge is the desired outcome, a multiple component design gives the best results.

Where skill is an objective, a multiple component design gives the best effects.

Where transfer to the classroom is the objective, the full array is needed— theory, demonstration, practice, and peer coaching.” [2]   (Joyce & Showers, 2002, pp 111-112.)

It is likely that you have seen the table below (or something similar) displayed in dozens of publications and presentations by PD experts to explain the relationships among types of training outcomes (knowledge, skill, transfer) referencing the percentage of outcomes participants are likely to attain when the combinations of components are employed.  These data are an extrapolation from the research and judgments from experiences of Joyce and Showers.

Training Components and Attainment of Outcomes in Terms of Percent of Participants
	Outcomes
Components	Knowledge (thorough)	Skill (strong)	Transfer (executive implementation)
Study of Theory	10	5	0
Demonstrations	30	20	0
Practice	60	60	5
Peer Coaching	95	95	95

 

An essential take away for me is that you need all four of the components for newly learned skills to be transferred into the classroom:

Study of Theory + Demonstrations + Practice + Peer Coaching.

These elements don’t need to occur in this order, but teachers need multiple opportunities to see demonstrations, along with frequent practice which could be planning lessons together, working out problems, rehearsing new lessons, developing materials. By adding the peer coaching component it is possible to see the 95% transfer levels of both knowledge and skills.

Unfortunately, “peer coaching” is oftenconfused with evaluative or supervisory practices that involve observations and feedback. [3] When the intent of the coaching work is to implement newly learned repertoire for the purpose of increasing student learning, the collaborative engagement of teachers involves deeply thinking about how students learn, designing lessons, developing instructional materials, and studying student responses to these efforts. The IPDM training manual and publications by Joyce and Showers define peer coaching as “the collaborative work of teachers to solve the problems/questions that arise during implementation; it begins in training settings and continues in the workplace following initial training.  Peer coaching provides both support for the community of teachers attempting to master new skills and the time for planning and lesson development so essential to changes in curriculum and instruction.”[4]

When teachers observe each other, the one doing the teaching is the “coach”.  The teacher in the observer role is being coached. This arrangement prevents the coaching interaction from becoming evaluative by avoiding the use of feedback that could be perceived as evaluative. Joyce and Showers found that eliminating feedback from the coaching process allowed for training time to be focused on the development of instructional skills rather than on learning how to deliver non-offensive feedback.

Educators I talk with often think that offering helpful advice to teachers after observations is an important aspect of peer coaching, but it is NOT. While some of the other coaching approaches use clinical or reflective supervisory methods that routinely include rely on focused feedback, peer coaching emphasizes teachers learning from each other as they plan instruction and together reflect on how students responded to their teaching.[5]

My first wish for my professional peers is that they have the opportunity to be mentored by an individual such as Bev – someone with great expertise and the willingness to apply their knowledge and skills in districts, buildings, and classrooms. My second wish is that they engage in peer coaching interaction as they learn something new. Both of these experiences changed how I think about my own learning, the learning of educators, and most importantly, the learning of students.