



































Farr & Saltmarsh (2018) Proof 2.pdf


Educational Renaissance Vol. 7  (2018)

Pr im ing Your  Environm ent  for  Grow t h Through a 
Collaborat ive Model of  Inst ruct ional Coaching 

Wendy J. Far r , PhD.  Arizona State University, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College

     email: Wendy.Farr@asu.edu

Sarah Salt m arsh, EdD.  Arizona State University, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College

     email: Sarah.Saltmarsh@asu.edu

Feature Article

Background 

As educators, we feel strongly that crucial 
attention needs to be paid to the quality of public 
education that is provided for English Language 
Learners (ELLs) in schools. ESSA (2017) defines an 
English Language Learner (ELL) as an individual 
who, among others things has difficulties in 
speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the 
English language that may be sufficient to deny 
him or her the ability to meet challenging state 
academic standards. Teachers have always had 
ELLs in their classrooms; however, they may not 
have been labeled as such or specifically 
supported. Approximately 10% of students in 
public schools are non-native English speakers, yet 
less than 1% are trained to work with ELLs 
specifically (Childs, 2013).  

The needs of ELLs in the United States are 

currently not being met (Gándara, 2010). Teacher 
preparation programs need to think in new and 
innovative ways to build knowledge and skills for 
pre-service teachers, so they can implement 
lessons that will support language acquisition and 
development of content knowledge.

Arizona State University?s Mary Lou Fulton 
Teachers College (MLFTC) is one of the largest 
teacher preparation programs in the country 
graduating approximately 600 teachers per year 
for certification. Of these 600 students, however, 
less than 1% of the teacher candidates graduate 
with a specialized language endorsement. MLFTC 
is situated in a state where ELLs have lower 
achievement outcomes than their peers, and this 
institution has dedicated itself to address the 
significant challenges these learners face. Schools 
in Arizona are home to a multitude of students 

Abst ract   

Teacher preparation is complex in nature. Students in K-12 education comprise of an increasingly 
culturally and linguistically diverse population. Standards have significantly evolved with state and 
Common Core State Standards that now place a greater emphasis on academic discourse both in 
written and oral forms. To better prepare the next generation of teachers to address these shifts in 
expectations, we are examining the influence of instructional coaching at the university level. The 
work encompasses professional development on research-based ELL principles to support the 
changing populations of students in conjunction with coaching sessions to enhance coursework. The 
results of this study were statistically significant and have set the stage for our next steps in 
sustainable change at the university level. 



FARR & SALTMARSH |  PRIMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH

with different cultures, languages, and 
experiences. From 1994-2010, the percent of ELLs 
in the US grew by over 63% and has grown steadily 
since (National Clearinghouse for English 
Language Acquisition, 2011). In Arizona, 87,607 
students identified as ELL (OELAS, 2017). The 
2013-2014 ELL demographics indicate that 79% of 
the state?s ELLs are in grades K-5, while 13% are in 
grades 6-8 and 8% are in grades 9-12 (Arizona 
Department of Education, 2015).

ELLs often miss out on key opportunities to gain 
(1) content knowledge in core subjects, (2) the 
academic language skills required for learning in 
schools, (3) and higher level literacy skills that are 
important for individual academic successes (Moll, 
2010). A federally funded team within MLFTC has 
focused their efforts on improving outcomes for 
diverse learners. This paper focuses on three key 
areas to help students in Arizona?s schools: 
instructional coaching, faculty institutes, and 
problem-based enhanced language learning 
(PBELL).   

1. Instructional Coaching: One-on-one      
collaboration in university classrooms and 
partner school classrooms to support 
faculty members and teacher candidates as 
they implement these principles. 

2. Faculty Institutes: On-going, job-embedded 
professional development for MLFTC 
faculty on the key principles of effective 
English language instruction. 

3. Problem-Based Enhanced Language Learning 
(PBELL): an interactive teaching approach 
that provides 100% of students with access 
to 100% of the content.   

  

Three Key Innovat ions 

Inst ruct ional Coaching & Facult y Inst it ut e 

Leveraging coaching practices with educators that 
intrinsically motivate, allow for input, and retain a 
sense of autonomy, while still maintaining a focus 
on student outcomes, can enhance the 
persistence necessary to meet the ever-increasing 
demand in our nation?s schools. One way that 

these concerns can be addressed is through 
instructional coaching using the Impact Cycle. This 
cycle was developed by Jim Knight and his 
associates at The Instructional Coaching Group in 
Kansas (Knight et al., 2015). Instructional coaching 
is a partnership where coaches work alongside 
teachers to ensure the incorporation of 
research-based instruction (Blanchard, 2011; 
Knight ,2007). A partnership approach to 
instructional coaching embodies four major 
components and the execution of a collaborative 
coaching conversation after each observation 
(coaching cycle): (1) content planning, (2) 
developing and using formative assessments, (3) 
delivering instruction, and (4) community building 
(Knight, 2007; Knight, 2015).  

  

iTeachELLs  

iTeachELLs modified the Impact Cycle of Coaching. 
Rather than focus on all four of components of the 
Impact Cycle over the course of a semester, the 
iTeachELLs instructional coaches concentrated 
their efforts on (1) content planning and (3) 
delivering instruction.  

The iTeachELLs Instructional Coaching approach is 
comprised of three key steps: Identify, Learn, and 
Improve (Knight, 2015). Each step is outlined below 
with a brief description of how iTeachELLs utilized 
it with the faculty they worked alongside.  

                     

Figure 1. Impact Cycle of Coaching (Knight et al., 
2015)  

Ident ify. iTeachELLs began with the instructional 

24



FARR & SALTMARSH |  PRIMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH

coach and the instructor working together to 
develop a ?clear picture of the current instructional 
reality? (Knight et al., 2015, p.12). The conversation 
focused explicitly on the content of instruction 
rather than instructional pedagogy, a fact that 
contributed to the overall success of this project. In 
this initial conversation, the focus was on the 
instructor?s current course syllabi and whether or 
not it provided opportunities for teacher 
candidates to learn how to effectively address the 
needs of culturally and linguistically diverse 
students. Based on what was discussed, the 
instructional coach and the instructor then agreed 
upon a realistic target for infusion of new content.  

Learn. Two main components define this step: (1) 
The instructional coach clearly explained the newly 
identified instructional content, and (2) The 
instructional coach modeled one way the 
instructor might implement the instructional 
content into his or her course. Knight (2015) and 
his colleagues offered multiple different methods 
of support including: modeling with students, 
modeling without students, co-teaching, visits to 
colleagues? classrooms, and video observations. 
iTeachELLs facilitated this new learning through a 
series of professional development sessions 
entitled Faculty Institutes. Within each Faculty 
Institute, one or more research-based instructional 
strategies were discussed and modeled by an 
instructional coach, and times was given to 
instructors to reflect on an upcoming class to 
establish a ?change they would like to see in 
student behavior, achievement, or participation,? 
and the actions that (s)he could take to create this 
change" (Knight et. al, 2015, p.12).  For example, 
the first Faculty Institute focused on the explicit 
planning and teaching of discipline-specific 
discourse for culturally and linguistically diverse 
students. The iTeachELLs instructional coaches 
modeled a mini-lesson focused on the discourse of 
argumentation and shared a resource knows as 
the Academic Language Function Toolkit (Kinsella, 
2010). As recommended by Knight et al. (2015), 
iTeachELLs instructional coaches would also offer 
to model (with and without students) and co-teach 
the new strategy alongside the instructors. The 

learn step includes implementation. 

Im prove. This step of the Impact Cycle allows the 
instructional coach and instructor to ?modify the 
way they use the identified teaching strategy? 
towards the accomplishment of their previously 
identified goal (Knight et. al, 2015, p.18). These 
modifications are discussed and planned during a 
reflective conversation between the instructional 
coach and the instructor. The reflective 
conversation utilized a structured set of questions, 
on both ?how the strategy was implemented? and 
?how student achievement was impacted.? 

Table 1

 iTeachELLs Instructional Coaching & Faculty Institute 
outline 

The model outlined in Table 1 is different from 
more traditional coaching models in multiple ways: 
First, it is intentionally designed for use in a higher 
education setting. Second, a key element includes 
content planning, where educators learn new 
content and develop a plan for implementation. 
Third, implementation is followed up with a 
coaching conversation that allows educators to 
reflect on the benefits and challenges of the new 
learning and determine what future 
implementation will look like. Unlike the traditional 

Step Actions

1. Identify -  Partner to identify the need  
- Select a strategy to address the need 

 2.  Learn: 
Faculty Institute 

-  Part 1:  Coach clearly explains the 
identified   strategy 

- Part 2: Coach models how to 
implement the strategy 

- (in classroom, out of classroom, 
co-teaching, visiting   other 
classrooms, video) 

 3.  Improve -  Monitor implementation of the 
strategy.   (observe implementation, 
review student work &   assessment 
data) 

- Reflective conversation 

25



FARR & SALTMARSH |  PRIMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH

?reinforcement and refinement? model, the Impact 
Cycle of Coaching developed and utilized by 
iTeachELLs allows the instructor to reflect on their 
own practice and direct future implementation. 
The focus is less on instructional pedagogy and 
more on content learning that is designed to 
enhance the preparation of teacher candidates.  

Problem -Based English Language Learning 
(PBELL) 

iTeachELLs has developed a new instructional 
model that combines the elements of 
Problem-Based Learning with the key principles of 
English Language Learning methods. PBELL is a 
unique approach to instruction that starts with 
problem-based learning and enhances the student 
experience by explicitly incorporating and 
supporting specific language skills. Although space 
limits prevent depicting a full example of PBELL in 
this article we do offer a white paper that expands 
on this topic as well as sample lesson plans for 
teachers (ASU Mary Lou Felton Teachers College, 
2018). 

In PBELL experiences, a student utilizes language 
collaboratively in order to access prior knowledge, 
research new topics, brainstorm and discuss 
potential solutions, and present new findings to an 
audience. In a classroom using PBELL, all language 
is considered an asset in supporting rigorous 
learning opportunities (Bostick, Lund, & Saltmarsh, 
2017). A PBELL lesson entails: (1) meaningful 
problem development, (2) language and content in 
tandem, (3) assessment of content and language, 
and (4) specific support and strategies. Utilizing the 
example above on discipline-specific discourse, 
iTeachELLs supports instructors as they identify 
the most appropriate discourse to plan for and 
model as they simultaneously work to expose their 
students to rigorous content. The Academic 
Language Function Toolkit (Kinsella, 2010) would 
be one example of a teacher support used to 
purposefully plan and teach the most appropriate 
discourse associated with the meaningful problem 
(grounded in content). 

The iTeachELLs team recognizes the workload 
teachers have and challenges educators to start 
small and incorporate two basic components into 
their daily lessons. We feel if learning can be 
grounded in real-life and relevant experiences as 
well as recognizing that language is a tool and 
needs to be specifically taught and modeled in all 
learning experiences then we may begin to see 
positive change for these unique learners and all 
students with diverse learning needs. 

Successes & Challenges 

The iTeachELLs team has experienced some 
significant successes as well as encountered some 
challenges throughout its inception in 2015. The 
three shown below specifically stand out as related 
to the content discussed in this paper.  

Table 2
iTeachELLs successes and challenges 

Conclusion  

Instructional coaching, as outlined in this paper, is 
sporadically implemented in the pk-12 educational 
setting and rarely utilized in higher education. A 
search was conducted by the iTeachELLs team, and 
one example of a coaching program situated in 
higher education found was at Harvard?s Derek 
Bok Center for Teaching and Learning. This center 

Successes  Challenges 

 Ability to provide individual 
coaching to both campus   
faculty and mentor teachers at 
school sites 

 Creating a ?culture of change? 
within a college and on   public 
school campuses. 

  

 Specific lesson plan 
development to support 
teacher and   students who are 
identified as ELLs. 

 Changing direction as new 
initiatives and college needs   
change 

 Building awareness and 
increasing conversation to 
improve   the educational 
climate for diverse learners 

 Creating sustainability after 
project completion 

26



FARR & SALTMARSH |  PRIMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH

partnered with faculty members to provide 
professional development and support for their 
teaching (Harvard University, 2017). Empirical 
research studies on coaching faculty in higher 
education were particularly limited. Mentoring in 
higher education was more common, but still 
limited (Chavez-Thibault, 2017; Knippelmeyer & 
Torraco, 2007). It is our opinion that if this model 
were applied more broadly across higher 
education settings it would have a positive effect 
on supporting some of our most critical 
instructors. Support for instructors in higher 
education beyond the initial years tends to 
diminish in many instructional environments. The 
Impact Cycle for coaching could enhance the 
practices of teacher preparation programs, 
providing much welcome support and inform our 
field?s desperate need to focus on retaining 
talented educators by providing experienced 
teachers time to both develop others and be 
developed (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & 
Carver-Thomas, 2016). 

  

References 

ASU Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College. (2018). 
iTeachELLs Teacher Quality Partnership Grant.  
Retrieved from 
https://education.asu.edu/iteachells  

Arizona Department of Education. (2015). ELL 
demographics 2013?2014: Percent of ELL  
students by grade level. Retrieved from 
http://www.azed.gov/english-language-learners
/ell-data/ell-demographics-2014/  

Blanchard, K. (2011). Situational Leadership II ? The 
Article. Retrieved from 
https://kenblanchard.com/Situational-Leadersh
ip-II  

Bostick, B., Lund, S., & Saltmarsh, S. (2017). 
Problem-Based Enhanced Language Learning: 
Ensuring Access to Both Language and Content. 
Retrieved from 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3wd2tdV3_jP
ZVpvWmU1Rm93cW8/view  

Chavez-Thibault, M. (2017). Instructional Coaching 
in Higher Education: Partnering to Infuse ELL 
Instructional Practices into Social Studies 
Courses. Retrieved from 
https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/186214
/content/Thibault_asu_0010E_16716.pdf. 

Childs, B. (2013). ESL teacher shortage.  Retreived 
from 
https://certificationmap.com/esl-teacher-sho
rtage/    

ESSA (2017). Retrieved on January 27th, 2018 
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title
20/pdf/USCODE-2011-title20-chap70-subchapIX-pa
rtA-sec7801.pdf. 

Gándara, P. (February 2010). Meeting students 
where they are. Educational Leadership, 67 (5), 
24?30. 

Harvard University. (2017). Derek Bok Center for 
Teaching and Learning vision and mission. 
Retrieved from 
http://bokcenter.harvard.edu/vision-mission 

Kinsella, K. (2010). Academic Language Function 
Tookit. Sweetwater District-Wide Academic 
Support Teams. Retrieved from 
https://sweetwaterschools.instructure.com/course
s/1080113/files/31344925 

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A 
partnership approach to improving instruction.  
Thousand Oaks, CA: NSDC. 

Knight, J. (2015). Better conversations: Coaching 
ourselves and each other to be more credible,  
caring, and connected. Thousand Oaks, CA: 
Corwin Press. 

Knight, J., Elford, M., Hock, M., Dunekack, D., 
Bradley, B., Deshler, D., & Knight, D. (2015). 3 
steps to great coaching: A simple but powerful 
instructional coaching cycle nets results. 
Journal of Staff Development, 36 (1), 11-18. 

Knippelmeyer, S., & Torraco, R. (2007, February). 
Mentoring as a developmental tool for higher  
education. Paper presented at Academy of 
Human Resource Development International  

27

https://education.asu.edu/iteachells
http://www.azed.gov/english-language-learners/ell-data/ell-demographics-2014/
http://www.azed.gov/english-language-learners/ell-data/ell-demographics-2014/
https://kenblanchard.com/Situational-Leadership-II  
https://kenblanchard.com/Situational-Leadership-II  
https://kenblanchard.com/Situational-Leadership-II  
https://kenblanchard.com/Situational-Leadership-II  
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3wd2tdV3_jPZVpvWmU1Rm93cW8/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3wd2tdV3_jPZVpvWmU1Rm93cW8/view
https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/186214/co ntent/Thibault_asu_0010E_16716.pdf. 
https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/186214/co ntent/Thibault_asu_0010E_16716.pdf. 
https://certificationmap.com/esl-teacher-shortage/
https://certificationmap.com/esl-teacher-shortage/
https://certificationmap.com/esl-teacher-shortage/


FARR & SALTMARSH |  PRIMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH

Research Conference in The Americas, 
Indianapolis, IN. 

Moll, L. (2010). Mobilizing culture, language, and 
educational practices: Fulfilling promises of  
Mendez and Brown. Educational Researcher, 
39(6), 451-460. 

OELAS (2017). Retrieved on January 27th, 2018 
http://www.azed.gov/oelas/el-demographics- 
2013-2014/ 

Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., Carver-Thomas, 
D (2016). A coming crisis in teaching?  Teacher 
demand, supply, and shortages in the U.S. 
Learning Policy Institute-Research Brief.  

This material is based upon research supported by 
the Department of Education (DOE), Teacher 
Quality Partnership (TQP) grant: ?Integrating STEM, 
Literacy, and Language to Prepare all Teachers to 
Work with English Language Learners.?  Any 
opinions, findings, and conclusions or 
recommendations expressed in this material are 
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect 
the views of DOE.  

28

http://www.azed.gov/oelas/el-demographics-

