Using unique statewide panel data from Tennessee, we describe instructional coach (IC) and teacher peer observer (TPO) distributions in terms of their teaching expertise and observable school and district characteristics. The evidence suggests ICs are more likely to work in districts with lower-performing teachers while working in schools with higher-performing teachers. District characteristics largely determine where TPOs work. We also find that ICs and TPOs possess relatively more teaching expertise than classroom teachers and that these positive differences grow in magnitude as the concentration of economically disadvantaged students in a school rises.
BartanenB. (2019). Identifying Principal Improvement (Working Paper EdWorking Paper No. 19-136). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. http://www.edworkingpapers.com/ai19-136
3.
BrophyJ.GoodT. L. (1986). Teacher Behavior and student achievement. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). Macmillan.
4.
CampbellS. L.RonfeldtM. (2018). Observational evaluation of teachers: Measuring more than we bargained for?American Educational Research Journal, 55, 1233–1267.
5.
ChettyR.FriedmanJ. N.RockoffJ. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of Teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633–2679.
6.
CoburnC. E.WoulfinS. L. (2012). Reading coaches and the relationship between policy and Practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 5–30.
7.
DentonC. A.HasbrouckJ. (2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship to consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19(2), 150–175.
8.
DesimoneL. M.PakK. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Theory Into Practice, 56(1), 3–12.
9.
DoanS. (2019). What Do Classroom Observation Scores Tell Us About Student Success? Capturing the Impact of Teachers Using At-Scale Classroom Observation Scores [Vanderbilt University]. https://ir.vanderbilt.edu/handle/1803/15448
10.
Galey-HornS.WoulfinS. L. (2021). Muddy Waters: The Micropolitics of Instructional Coaches’ work in evaluation. American Journal of Education, 127(3), 441–470.
11.
GallucciC.Van LareM. D.YoonI. H.BoatrightB. (2010). Instructional coaching: Building Theory about the role and organizational support for Professional Learning. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 919–963.
12.
GoldhaberD.LaveryL.TheobaldR. (2015). Uneven playing field? Assessing the teacher quality gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 293–307.
13.
GrissomJ. A.BartanenB.MitaniH. (2019). Principal sorting and the distribution of Principal Quality. AERA Open, 5(2), 233285841985009.
14.
HarrisD. N.SassT. R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 798–812.
HillH.GrossmanP. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371–384.
17.
HuguetA.MarshJ. A.FarrellC. (2014). Building Teachers’ data-use capacity: Insights from strong and developing coaches. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22, 52.
18.
HunterS. B. (2020). The unintended effects of policy-assigned teacher observations: Examining the validity of observation scores. AERA Open, 6(2), 1-16.
19.
HunterS. B.RodriguezL. A. (2019). The burden of teacher evaluation on school Administrator Stress and turnover. Poster Session II. Association for Education Finance and Policy.
20.
JacksonC. K. (2018). What do test scores miss? The importance of teacher effects on Non–Test score outcomes. Journal of Political Economy, 126(5), 2072–2107.
21.
JohnsonS. M.DonaldsonM. L. (2004). Sustaining new teachers through professional growth. In JohnsonS. M. (Ed.), Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools (pp. 225–248). Jossey-Bass.
22.
JoyceB.ShowersB. (1996). Educational Leadership. 53.6. Educational Leadership: Journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A, 53(6), 12-16.
23.
KalogridesD.LoebS. (2013). Different teachers, different peers: The magnitude of student sorting within schools. Educational Researcher, 42(6), 304–316.
24.
KimballS. M.MilanowskiA. (2009). Examining teacher evaluation validity and leadership decision making within a standards-based evaluation system. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(1), 34–70.
KraftM. A.BlazarD.HoganD. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588.
27.
KraftM. A.GilmourA. (2016). Can Principals promote teacher development as evaluators? A case study of principals’ views and experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(5), 711–753.
28.
LaddH. F.SorensenL. C. (2017). Returns to teacher experience: Student Achievement and motivation in Middle School. Education Finance and Policy, 12(2), 241–279.
29.
ManginM.StoelingaS. R. (2011). Peer? Expert?Journal of Staff Development, 32(3), 48-51.
30.
MurisC. (2017). Estimation in the fixed-effects ordered logit model. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 99(3), 465–477.
31.
PapayJ. P.KraftM. A. (2015). Productivity returns to experience in the teacher labor market: Methodological challenges and new evidence on long-term career improvement. Journal of Public Economics, 130, 105–119.
32.
RussellJ. L.CorrentiR.SteinM. K.BillV.HannanM.SchwartzN.BookerL. N.PrattN. R.MatthisC. (2020). Learning from adaptation to support instructional improvement at scale: Understanding Coach adaptation in the TN Mathematics Coaching Project. American Educational Research Journal, 57(1), 148–187.
33.
SailorsM.ShanklinN. (2010). Introduction: Growing evidence to support coaching in literacy and Mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 1–6.
34.
SherrillJ. A. (1999). Preparing teachers for leadership roles in the 21st Century. Theory Into Practice, 38(1), 56–61.
35.
SnellJ.SwansonJ. (2000). April). The essential knowledge and skills of teacher leaders: A search for a conceptual framework. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
36.
SteinbergM. P.SartainL. (2021). What explains the race gap in teacher performance ratings? Evidence from Chicago Public Schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 43(1), 60–82.
UrbanskiA.ErskineR. (2000). School reform, TURN, and teacher compensation. Phi Delta Kappan, January, 367–370.
44.
WayneA. J.YoungsP. (2003). Teacher characteristics and Student Achievement Gains: A. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122.
45.
WeinerJ.WoulfinS. L. (2018). Sailing across the divide: Challenges to the transfer of teacher leadership. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13(3), 210–234.
46.
WennerJ. A.CampbellT. (2017). The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 134–171.
WoulfinS. L.RigbyJ. G. (2017). Coaching for coherence: How Instructional Coaches Lead Change in the Evaluation Era. Educational Researcher, 46(6), 323–328.
49.
York-BarrJ.DukeK. (2004). What Do We Know about Teacher Leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
