Is Coaching Having The Positive Impact We Want It To?

By Maz Foucher

An analysis of coaching in education, highlighting its potential benefits for teacher wellbeing and retention, while addressing challenges in implementation and misunderstandings of the coaching model.

Within the education world, it is becoming clear that coaching is seen as a positive intervention with the potential to support staff development along with wellbeing and retention. And yet, when I speak to teachers about coaching, I have heard the opposite story – that for some staff, coaching has had a negative impact on their wellbeing and is something to be feared and avoided. So why do we have these opposing viewpoints?

While researching teacher retention for my MA study last year ago, I repeatedly came across this same theory in the literature – that coaching can support teachers to remain in the profession. I must admit to being somewhat confused by this at first as, during my own teaching career, I have had several experiences of coaching which ultimately had not improved my wellbeing in the long term or prompted me to want to remain in teaching. However, since then, I have explored, experienced and been involved in research which has convinced me that coaching is a positive way forward for supporting educators. Indeed, coaching as a key strategy for retention is also a recommendation in the recent Missing Mothers Report by the New Britain Project and the MTPT Project (McShane and Sheppard, 2024) and this has compelled me to revisit my research study and realign it with my current knowledge to suggest ways forward in clearing up some of the confusion around coaching.

Firstly, it is important to draw a clear distinction between coaching and mentoring. A mentor is considered to be an expert in a particular field whose role it is to guide another, usually less experienced, colleague. Whereas in the coaching models advocated by the likes of John Whitmore and Julie Starr, the coach does not need to be an expert in the field which is being discussed, only to possess expertise in asking the right questions. It is assumed that the coachee will have the answers; the premise is that the coachee is the expert in themselves and the coach’s role is therefore to support them to analyse their own skills, values and barriers, thereby enabling them to make better decisions and take action to set goals and achieve personal or professional growth (Whitmore, 2009). It is important to keep this in mind when analysing which models of coaching are being used in our schools and the way in which we support staff and the development of a coaching culture within education.

Coaching is not a new concept in education: as far back as 1982, it was recommended that a coaching approach should be used in schools (Joyce & Showers, 1982). Since I joined the profession in 2002, the use of coaching and discussions about its impact have steadily increased, gaining particular attention over the past five years. The main ways in which coaching is used in education are:

• coaching at a leadership level, i.e. leaders being coached and leaders coaching their staff
• coaching at a pedagogical level, usually peer or instructional coaching

Leaders being coached

It is encouraging that headteachers can now access coaching through various professional schemes and offers. The coaching of headteachers is usually provided by an external provider and there is also a coaching offer for those on National Professional Qualification for Headship (NPQH) programmes, particularly for leaders of challenging schools (Teach First, 2023). There is growing evidence that coaching can improve the wellbeing and retention of headteachers by helping to counteract the impact of the stress involved in their roles. I have never been a headteacher, so I am unable to draw upon any personal experience of this approach, but the headteachers and leaders I know have expressed positive outcomes from the coaching they have undertaken and certainly the literature would support this. However, given the persistently high levels of stress and the attrition rate amongst headteachers, I also believe that the pressure and accountability within the role cannot be counteracted by coaching alone. One suggestion would be that this should be used in a blended approach, along with reflective supervision provided and funded by the Department for Education (Education Support, 2023), to support school leaders most effectively.

Leaders coaching their staff

Many leaders now also carry out coaching sessions with their staff, but with varying results.  Research suggests that formal coaching works best when the coach is not the coachee’s line manager: the trusting, open conversations needed for good coaching to take place are harder to establish between a boss and an employee. In this context, coachees are likely to hold back when asked to analyse some of their barriers to certain goals and objectives. In a high-pressure environment like education, these inauthentic coaching conversations could actually have a negative effect (Weston, 2023). Coaching works best when the coach is able to be objective and when power dynamics are not at play. So, within the current performance-focused education sector, it could be said that coaching should be left to external coaches, or colleagues and peers, rather than leaders and line managers.

Peer coaching

Peer coaching is another option for professional development and is, from my research and experience, the approach which has the greatest potential to impact positively on staff wellbeing and retention. This approach involves two or more colleagues working together within the framework of a coaching conversation to analyse issues that they want to resolve within their teaching practice as well as their professional lives. The GROWTH coaching model – an adapted version of Whitmore’s GROW model – can be used to frame these conversations (Buck, 2018). From my own experiences of this approach, having an impartial colleague to talk to, and to hold me to account for my action steps, can be a positive developmental strategy. Peer coaching is not affected by the power dynamic which occurs when teachers are coached by an employer or line manager, meaning that this more-collaborative process is much easier and supportive to engage with.

Allowing teachers to take ownership of their professional development also increases the sense of agency and autonomy they feel within their work. Using this approach, teachers can determine focus areas and actions for the school development plan, which thereby engages staff more readily in this process and ensures that they feel valued personally and professionally (Atwal, 2019). Within my own career, I have observed that it is this sense of feeling valued professionally and being empowered to control our working lives which supports teacher wellbeing more than many other strategies.

Instructional coaching

When we talk about coaching in education, I believe that this is the coaching model that many people are referring to, particularly those with a negative view of coaching. It is this approach which is also the one which causes the most misunderstanding. It goes by a variety of names but is usually referred to as instructional or pedagogical coaching. Under this umbrella term, there are also several specific models, with incremental coaching being just one of these. This is a strategy in which an experienced teacher works alongside another teacher, within and following a lesson, to observe and provide advice and feedback on the teacher’s pedagogy. There is an increasing body of research and evidence to suggest that this approach can positively transform the quality of teaching and the inclusion of this sort of coaching approach in the Early Career Framework also suggests a governmental belief in its potential for improving the retention rates of new teachers (DFE, 2019). However, experiences of this sort of coaching vary hugely.

One positive aspect of an instructional coaching model is that it heralded a welcome move away from formal lesson observations with one-word judgements.  However, I have also seen how frustrating instructional coaching can be if used with staff who do not have the right knowledge or experience within their practice to draw upon. As Starr (2017) reminds us “You can’t coach knowledge” so if we are asking coaching questions of an inexperienced colleague which require specific answers which they don’t yet have, this can in fact undermine their confidence. A cautious and careful approach is required.

Another factor to consider is that coaching should never be linked to performance management or used as strategy to correct ineffective teaching or indeed implement a specific pre-determined teaching approach. This in fact is in direct conflict with the whole coaching philosophy (Weston, 2023).  Sadly, the experience of many teachers I have spoken to, in a range of school settings, suggest that this is the only experience they have of coaching within the profession and in some cases, it is not being carried out within the supportive, non-judgmental, trusting relationships required for it to work.

I myself have seen that this approach can be a positive strategy for improving teaching but I believe it is the name which causes some of the frustration. Unless the coaching model gives the coachee the autonomy to decide upon their own teaching approach, I would suggest that we need to come up with another name for this approach. Due to being involved in some directive programmes of instructional coaching, there are currently growing numbers of teachers who believe that ‘coaching’ means being told what to do, which is in direct opposite to what coaching really is.

Implementing a genuine coaching culture

“If what you really want is for teachers to start doing some specific task or adopt some specific strategy then coaching is not the right tool. Coaching always gives the coachee control”.

(Quote from R Jones, in Munro, Barr and Van Nieuweburgh, 2020)

It is clear then that, although there is some growing evidence that coaching is having a positive impact on staff performance, self-confidence and wellbeing, given the ongoing well-being and retention crisis in education, the current coaching methods in schools are clearly not yet solving the problem. I would suggest that this is because what is being implemented across large parts of the education sector is not always a true coaching model – it can be too directive and therefore undermines teachers’ autonomy and self-belief. I would add that we need to rename and redefine some of the more directive coaching models we are using and find some way of distinguishing them from the person-centred, supportive, career coaching which many teachers really need and which the Missing Mothers report recommends would have that all-important positive impact on teachers’ wellbeing and therefore on retention.

References

Atwal, K. (2019). Thinking school: developing a dynamic learning community. John Catt

Educational Ltd.

Buck, A. (2018). Leadership matters 3.0 : how leaders at all levels can create great schools.

John Catt Educational Ltd.

DFE (2019). Early Career Framework. January 2019. Department for Education.

Education Support (2023). Wellbeing support for school and FE leaders.  Www.educationsupport.org.uk.

Joyce, B., and Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational leadership, 40, 4-

Munro, C., Barr, M., and van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2020). Creating coaching cultures in schools.

Sustaining depth and meaning in school leadership: keeping your head. Jackson, E and Berkeley, A. (Eds.) Routledge

McShane, A and Sheppard, E. (2024). Missing Mothers: Breaking the cycle of teacher

             attrition. New Britain Project and MTPTP Project.

Starr, J. (2017). Brilliant coaching: how to be a brilliant coach in your workplace. Pearson

Education Limited.

Teach First (2023). NPQH Early Headship Coaching Offer | Www.teachfirst.org.uk.

Weston, D. (2023) Five ways to avoid ineffective “instructional coaching.” (March 2023). Teacher Development Trust.

Whitmore, J. (2009). Coaching for performance : growing people, performance and purpose. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.