{"id":2752,"date":"2025-02-20T09:49:45","date_gmt":"2025-02-20T17:49:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/theothermath.com\/?p=2752"},"modified":"2025-04-17T13:17:37","modified_gmt":"2025-04-17T20:17:37","slug":"meaningful-math-coaching-with-the-collaborative-lesson-design-cycle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/theothermath.com\/index.php\/2025\/02\/20\/meaningful-math-coaching-with-the-collaborative-lesson-design-cycle\/","title":{"rendered":"Meaningful math coaching with the Collaborative Lesson Design Cycle"},"content":{"rendered":"

I have been teaching mathematics since 1989 and during this time I have experienced no less than 3 or 4 math coaching initiatives either as the recipient of the math coaching or the deliverer of said math coaching. These sudden moments of interest in math coaching are ALWAYS connected to some external event: the state providing districts with a short-tern bucket of money for coaching; or transitioning to Algebra for All reorganization of standards; or implementation of the new Common Core standards.<\/span><\/p>\n

Each and every wave of math coaching eventually fizzled out after a few years. Either the coaching position was shut down completely sending the coaches back into the classroom or the coaching position was watered down to such a degree that the focus was no longer on MATH coaching.<\/span><\/p>\n

As districts look toward adopting a much needed new math curriculum, I see that we are entering yet another two or three years of district suddenly being interested in plucking teachers out of the classroom to be coaches\u2026ostensibly to improve math instruction\u2026with no fundamental difference from the previous math coaching initiatives that have fizzled out.<\/span><\/p>\n

Despite lots of evidence that math-specific curriculum-based professional learning (CBPL) increases teacher effectiveness and improves student achievement,[1]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0it is remarkably challenging for districts to provide the necessary CBPL necessary for teachers.<\/span><\/p>\n

Rather than providing sustained and ongoing\u00a0math-specific<\/span>\u00a0instructional coaching, it is common for districts to mistakenly believe TOSAs, acting as general instructional coaches (coaching a wide variety of subjects), is good enough. Plucking teachers out of the classroom and asking them to be general instructional coaches is NOT sufficient. Too often, these newly minted coaches never receive proper training in andragogy (the science of adult learning), nor do they receive the requisite math content training to develop their mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT) that would enable them to provide the curriculum-based professional learning.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Nine Essential Math Coaching Actions<\/h2>\n

The National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (now branded simply as NCSM) has\u00a0nine essential actions<\/a><\/span>[2]<\/a><\/sup> for mathematics coaching for empowering teachers to improve student learning. Unpacking each of these actions should be a series of blog posts themselves, but for now I’ll just list them here…<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Demonstrate a commitment to coaching<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \n
    1. \n