The Design and Implementation of a Peer Coaching Program

ABSTRACT Peer coaching was first proposed more than fifteen years ago as an attempt to connect staff development with whole school improvement. We describe the implementation of a peer coaching program at the high school level that allows groups of two or three teachers to assist each other with their teaching. In the evaluation, teachers report that they improved teaching techniques and overcame feelings of isolation. This study is important because it adds to the demonstration of successful field experiences with peer coaching. It can be difficult to harness the instructional talents of a teaching staff in a traditional high school. Barriers to change include a lack of vision, a "four wall mentality" of isolation, and teachers' doubts about their ability to collaborate. This paper describes a peer-coaching program at the high school level that overcomes these barriers and allows groups of two or three teachers to assist each other in developing more expertise in teaching. We wanted to know if the program would enhance the use of new teaching methods and strategies and overcome teachers' feelings of isolation. WHAT IS PEER COACHING? More than fifteen years have passed since peer coaching was proposed as an onsite dimension of staff development (Joyce and Showers 1980). Numerous staff development practices are called "coaching. " These include "technical coaching," "collegial coaching," "challenge coaching," "team coaching," "cognitive coaching," and "peer coaching" (Garmston, 1987). Peer coaching is a confidential process through which two or more professional colleagues work together to reflect on current practices; expand, refine, and build new skills; share ideas; teach one another; conduct classroom research; or solve problems in the workplace (Robbins, 1991). The traditional goal of peer coaching is to provide positive feedback to instructors. Often, teachers receive negative comments from administrators and students on teaching evaluations. It is important for teachers to realize such comments "come with the territory" and do not mean that they are ineffective as instructors (Munro and Elliot, 1987). Instead, it is more positive to focus on change and personal development. Peer coaches also provide support and companionship for their partners (Joyce and Showers, 1982). Finally, peer coaching may improve student learning because good instructors teach their students more (Weimer, 1993). Few scholars debate the usefulness of peer coaching. Some believe its success may stem from the importance assigned to reciprocality (Mills, 1994). Others note that its success may result from its focus on improving rather than rating teaching (Munro and Elliot, 1987). There are several qualities that all successful programs have. First, peer coaching must "not be confused with, or used for, evaluation of teachers" (Showers and Joyce, 1996). It is vital that participants (coaches) must "be clear about the nature of the (coaching) relationship, and not use it for evaluation or judgment" (Costa and Kallick, 1993). Peer coaching models based on evaluation were not successful as non-evaluative models since no collaboration or teacher-- initiated change was exercised (Nolan, Hawkes, and Francis, 1993). The second aspect of an effective program is trust among the participants. "Only in an atmosphere of trust will peers freely admit their failings to each other and be receptive to suggestions for improvement" (Koballa et al. 1992). Lack of trust can be the downfall of the peer coaching process. Caccia (1996) emphasized the role trust in the coaching process when he said, "Coaching exists in name only unless the coach and the person being coached share trust and a sense of purpose" (p. 18). Flexibility should be a component of a successful peer-coaching model. There are two general ways to participate in peer coaching, specific and nonspecific. In specific participation, teachers want help with certain, predetermined issues. …