Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement

Kristin E. Harbour; Evthokia S. Saclarides; Jill L. Adelson; Karen S. Karp

doi:10.29333/iejme/10907

Full Text (PDF)

Kristin E. Harbour ¹ ^* , Evthokia S. Saclarides ², Jill L. Adelson ³, Karen S. Karp ⁴

More Detail

¹ University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA² University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA³ Adelson Research & Consulting, LLC, Durham, NC, USA⁴ Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

In this study, we used hierarchical linear modeling to examine restricted-use 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data to explore relationships between principal-reported time spent on the different NAEP responsibilities of mathematics coaches and specialists (MCSs) and the achievement scores of approximately 37,400 fourth-grade students in 1,500 U.S. elementary schools. The model included adjustments for composite covariates, control variables, and sampling weights. Significant relationships between principal-reported time spent on six different NAEP-defined responsibilities provided by full-time MCSs and fourth-grade students’ mathematics achievement were observed, including relationships between achievement and MCSs assisting both teachers and students. Implications for the effective use of MCSs in schools and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

mathematics coach
mathematics specialist
elementary
mathematics achievement

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

INT ELECT J MATH ED, Volume 16, Issue 2, May 2021, Article No: em0640

https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

Publication date: 15 May 2021

Article Views: 1935

Article Downloads: 1990

Open Access Disclosures References How to cite this article

Disclosure

Declaration of Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest is declared by author(s).

Data sharing statement: Data supporting the findings and conclusions are available upon request from the corresponding author(s).

References

Ai, X., & Rivera, N. (2003). Linking ideas to practice: Effectiveness of coaching upon teacher practice [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 23, Chicago, IL.
Alloway, M., & Jilk, L. M. (2010). Supporting students by supporting teachers: Coaching moves that impact learning. In P. Brosnan, D. B. Erchick, & L. Flevares (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32^nd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Volume VI, p. 1420-1427). The Ohio State University.
Baldinger, E. M. (2014, April). Learning together: Looking for learning in coach-teacher interactions. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Research Conference, New Orleans, LA.
Balfanz, R., Mac Iver, D. J., & Byrnes, V. (2006). The implementation and impact of evidence-based mathematics reforms in high poverty middle schools: A multi- site, multi-year study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 33-64. https://doi.org/10.2307/30035051
Barlow, A. T., Burroughs, E. A., Harmon, S. E., Sutton, J. T., & Yopp, D. A. (2014). Assessing views of coaching via a video-based tool. ZDM, 46, 227-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0558-7
Bean, R. M., Draper, J. A., Hall, V., Vandermolen, J., & Zigmond, N. (2010). Coaches and coaching in reading first schools. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1086/653471
Becker, J. R. (2001). Classroom coaching: An emerging method of professional development. In R. Speiser, C. Maher & C. Walter (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 751-760). Snowbird, UT.
Campbell, P. F. (1996). Empowering children and teachers in the elementary mathematics class- rooms of urban schools. Urban Education, 30, 449-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085996030004005
Campbell, P. F., & Malkus, N. N. (2011). The impact of elementary mathematics coaches on student achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 430-454. https://doi.org/10.1086/657654
Chval, K. B., Arbaugh, F., Lannin, J. K., van Garderen, D., Cummings, L., Estapa, A. T., & Huey, M. E. (2010). The transition from experienced teacher to mathematics coach: Establishing a new identity. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 191-216. https://doi.org/10.1086/653475
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics (Technical Report No. 403). National Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED284181.pdf
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181-199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140
Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1241947
Deussen, T., Coskie, T., Robinson, L., & Autio, E. (2007). “Coach” can mean many things: Five categories of literacy coaches in Reading First (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 005). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northwest.
Ellington, A., Whitenack, J., & Edwards, D. (2017). Effectively coaching middle school teachers: A case for teacher and student learning. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 177-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.012
Elliott, R., Kazemi, E., Lesseig, K., Mumme, J., Carroll, C., & Kelley-Petersen, M. (2009). Conceptualizing the work of leading mathematical tasks in professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 364-379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109341150
Fennell, F. (2017). We need mathematics specialists now: A historical perspective and next steps. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3-18). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Foster, D. & Noyce, P. (2004). The mathematics assessment collaborative: Performance testing to improve instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 367-374. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408500507
Gerretson, H., Bosnick, J., & Schofield, K. (2008). A case for content specialists as the elementary classroom teacher. The Teacher Educator, 43, 302-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730802249866
Gibbons, L. K., & Cobb, P. (2017). Focusing on teacher learning opportunities to identify potentially productive coaching activities. Journal of Teacher Education, 68, 411-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117702579
Gibbons, L. K., Kazemi, E., Hintz, A., & Hartmann, E. (2017). Teacher time out: Educators learning together in and through practice. Journal of Mathematics Educational Leadership, 18, 28-46.
Gibbons, L. K., Kazemi, E., & Lewis, R. M. (2017). Developing collective capacity to improve mathematics instruction: Coaching as a lever for school-wide improvement. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 231-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.002
Goodman, T., McCoy, A., & Campbell, L. (2017). A collaborative model: From establishing certification to developing and delivering a program. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 61-68). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Harbour, K. E., Adelson, J. L., Karp, K. S., Pittard, C. M. (2018). Examining the relationships among mathematics coaches and specialists, student achievement, and disability status: A multi-level analysis using National Assessment of Education Progress data. The Elementary School Journal, 118(4), 654-679. https://doi.org/10.1086/697529
Harrington, R. A., Burton, L., & Beaver, C. (2017). Answering the call by developing an online elementary mathematics specialist program. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 303-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.01.001
Haver, W. E., Trinter, C. P., & Inge, V. L. (2017). The Virginia mathematics specialist initiative: Collaborative effort among all components of the VA mathematics community. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 289-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.003
Hopkins, M., Ozimek, D., & Sweet, T. M. (2017). Mathematics coaching and instructional reform: Individual and collective change. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 215-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.11.003
Kane, B. D., & Rosenquist, B. (2019). Relationships between instructional coaches’ time use and district-and school-level policies and expectations. American Educational Research Journal, 56, 1718-1768. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219826580
Lesseig, K., Elliott, R., Kazemi, E., Kelley-Petersen, M., Campbell, M., Mumme, J., & Carroll, C. (2017). Leader noticing of facilitation in videocases of mathematics professional development. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 20, 591-619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-016-9346-y
Matsumura, L. C., Sartoris, M., Bickel, D. D., & Garnier, H. E. (2009). Leadership for literacy coaching: The principal’s role in launching a new coaching program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 655-693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X09347341
McCoach, D. B., & Adelson, J. L. (2010). Dealing with dependence (Part 1): Understanding the effects of clustered data. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 152-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210363076
McGatha, M. (2008). Levels of engagement in establishing coaching relationships. Teacher Development, 12, 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530802038147
McGatha, M. B., & Rigelman, N. R. (2017). Introduction. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. xiii-xv). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
McGatha, M. B., Davis, R., & Stokes, A. (2015). The impact of mathematics coaching on teachers and students (Brief). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
McKnight, P.E. & McKnight, K.M. (2011). Missing data in secondary data analysis. In K. H. Trzesniewski, M. B. Donnellan, & R. E. Lucas (Eds.), Secondary data analysis: An introduction for psychologists (p. 83-101). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12350-005
Mudzimiri, R., Burroughs, E.A., Luebeck, J., Sutton, J., & Yopp, D. (2014). A look inside mathematics coaching: Roles, content, and dynamics. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(53), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n53.2014
Munson, J. (2017). Examining the efficacy of side-by-side coaching for growing responsive teacher-student interactions in elementary classrooms. In E. Galindo & J. Newton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29^th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 471-474). Hoosier Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators.
National Center for Education Statistics (2009). NAEP Technical Documentation. Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/
National Center for Education Statistics (2011). The Nation’s report card: Mathematics 2011 (NCES 2012-458). Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.
National Center of Education Statistics. (2013). The Nation’s report card: Mathematics 2013. Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. U.S. Department of Education.
Neuberger, J. (2012). Benefits of a teacher and coach collaboration: A case study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31, 290-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.12.004
Neufeld, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A Strategy for Developing Instructional Capacity: Promises & Practicalities. Aspen Institute.
Obara, S. & Sloan, M. (2009). The evolving role of a mathematics coach during the implementation of performance standards. Professional Educator, 33(2), 1-13.
Olson, J. C., & Barrett, J. E. (2004). Coaching teachers to implement mathematics reform recommendations. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 6, 63-78.
Polly, D. (2012). Supporting mathematics instruction with an expert coaching model. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 14(1), 78-93.
Polly, D., Mraz, M., & Algozzine, R. (2013). Implications for developing and researching elementary school mathematics coaches. School Science and Mathematics, 113, 297-307. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12029
Race, K., Ho, E., & Bower, L. (2002, April 1-5). Documenting in-classroom support and coaching activities of a professional development program directed toward school-wide change: An integral part of an organization’s evaluation efforts [Paper presentation]. The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. (2002). Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). Sage.
Rigelman, N. R., & Wray, J. A. (2017). Current state of mathematics specialist state certification and standards. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 33-38). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470316696
Rudd, L. C., Lambert, M. C., Satterwhite, M., & Smith, C. H. (2009). Professional development + coaching = enhanced teaching: Increasing usage of math mediated language in preschool classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0320-5
Saclarides, E. S., & Lubienski, S.T. (2020). The influence of administrative policies and expectations on coach-teacher interactions. The Elementary School Journal, 120, 528-554. https://doi.org/10.1086/707196
Schafer, J. L. (1999). Multiple imputation: A primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8, 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029900800102
Schwartz, C. S., Morge, S. P., Rachlin, S. L., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2017). A blended online model for instruction. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 69-76). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5^th ed.). Routledge.
Strutchens, M. E., & Martin, G. (2017). A case for secondary mathematics coaches. In M. B. McGatha & N. R. Rigelman (Eds.), Elementary mathematics specialists: Developing, refining, and examining programs that support mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 77-84). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Webel, C., Conner, K. A., Sheffel, C., Tarr, J. E., & Austin, C. (2017). Elementary mathematics specialists in “departmentalized” teaching assignments: Affordances and constraints. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 196-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.006

How to cite this article

APA

Harbour, K. E., Saclarides, E. S., Adelson, J. L., & Karp, K. S. (2021). Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(2), em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

Vancouver

Harbour KE, Saclarides ES, Adelson JL, Karp KS. Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2021;16(2):em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

AMA

Harbour KE, Saclarides ES, Adelson JL, Karp KS. Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2021;16(2), em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

Chicago

Harbour, Kristin E., Evthokia S. Saclarides, Jill L. Adelson, and Karen S. Karp. "Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2021 16 no. 2 (2021): em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

Harvard

Harbour, K. E., Saclarides, E. S., Adelson, J. L., and Karp, K. S. (2021). Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(2), em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907

MLA

Harbour, Kristin E. et al. "Exploring Relationships Among Responsibilities of Mathematics Coaches and Specialists and Student Achievement". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 16, no. 2, 2021, em0640. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10907