University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Principals’ Impact on the Effective Enactment of Instructional Coaching that Promotes Equity:
An Evaluation Study
by
Kerisha Tillmon

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2020

Copyright 2020 Kerisha Tillmon

ii
Dedication

To my son, TJ, your birth was the motivation that propelled me to start this journey. Being your
mom is the greatest honor of my life. I hope you find inspiration from my pursuits and passion
for learning. My greatest desire is that you find fulfilment in your life and know that anything is
possible for you. I love you.
To my parents and sisters, without your love and support I could not have made it through this
process. You all have been my constant cheerleaders. This has been quite a rollercoaster ride, but
you have been there for me through it all. Your belief in me never wavered. I hope I have made
you proud.

iii
Acknowledgements
To Dr. Phillips, my committee chair, I am immensely grateful for your support and
guidance throughout this process. I am in awe of your brilliance, wisdom, patience, and
dedication to equity. Dr. Robles, your course set the trajectory of this dissertation. I am forever
appreciative for the opportunity to learn from you. Thank you for your support and for agreeing
to serve on my committee. Dr. Seli, thank you for your suggestions and feedback. They helped
me narrow my focus and I am grateful. Dr. Ott, your belief in me helped me find confidence in
myself. Dr. Canny your guidance and patience at a critical time in my life prevented me from
giving up prematurely. You will never know how much your calls, e-mails, and concern for me
kept me going. Thank you.
To my colleagues and friends in Cohort 11, this journey has been so meaningful and fun
because of the relationships I have been blessed to form with you. Heather Case, Sarah Stashkiw,
Shane’a Thomas, Jason Kehoe, and Amy Stoplestad, I will cherish the friendships we’ve
established for the rest of my life. Thank you for all of your support. Fight on!
To my sister friends, Dominique and Angela, you have helped me in so many ways that I
cannot begin to put into words. Thank you for always having my back.
And finally, to my family for always being there when I needed you, listening to my
frantic cries, and assuring me I could do this, I am forever grateful. You all are the best support
system anyone could ever wish for. I love you all.

iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ix

Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Introduction of the Problem of Practice ...................................................................................... 1
Organizational Context and Mission .......................................................................................... 2
Organizational Goal .................................................................................................................... 3
Related Literature ........................................................................................................................ 4
Importance of the Evaluation ...................................................................................................... 5
Description of Stakeholder Groups ............................................................................................. 6
Stakeholder Group for the Study ................................................................................................ 6
Purpose of the Project and Questions ......................................................................................... 9
Methodological Framework ...................................................................................................... 10
Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 11
Organization of the Project ....................................................................................................... 11

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 13
Influences on Principals and Instructional Coaching ................................................................ 14
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework ............................................................ 23
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .......................................................... 25

Chapter Three: Methods .............................................................................................................. 40
Participating Stakeholders ........................................................................................................ 40
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ...................................................... 41
Data Collection and Instrumentation ........................................................................................ 41
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 43
Credibility and Trustworthiness ................................................................................................ 44
Ethics ......................................................................................................................................... 44

v
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 46
Participating Stakeholders ........................................................................................................ 47
Research Question One: Knowledge Findings ......................................................................... 48
Research Question One: Motivation Findings .......................................................................... 58
Research Question Two: Organizational Findings ................................................................... 63
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 68

Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 71
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ....................................................................... 85
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ............................................................................. 98
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................... 99
Implications for Practice ......................................................................................................... 100
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 101

References ................................................................................................................................... 104

Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 116
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................. 116
Appendix B ............................................................................................................................. 118
Appendix C ............................................................................................................................. 119
Appendix D ............................................................................................................................. 121

vi
List of Tables
Table 1 Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals ..................... 9
Table 2 Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessment for Analysis ......................................... 32
Table 3 Motivational Influences, Type, and Assessments for Analysis ....................................... 35
Table 4 Organizational Cultural Models, Settings, and Influences .............................................. 39
Table 5 Study Participants ............................................................................................................ 39
Table 6 Participants 'Comments on Students' Social Emotional Learning Needs ........................ 49
Table 7 Participants' Comments on Student Academic Needs ..................................................... 50
Table 8 Participants' Responses Regarding Effectice Instructional Coaching Strategies ............ 52
Table 9 Effective Practices Identified by Participants .................................................................. 53
Table 10 Participants' Responses Related to Competing Priorities .............................................. 56
Table 11 Participants' Responses Regarding Teachers Feeling Supported .................................. 59
Table 12 Participants' Responses on Instructional Coaching Improving Students Achievement 60
Table 13 Participants' Responses Related to Collaboration with Instructional Coaches .............. 62
Table 14 Participants' Responses Related to Pearl City ISD's Funding ....................................... 64
Table 15 Participants' Responses Regarding Pearl City ISD's Lack of Support .......................... 66
Table 16 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ......................................... 73
Table 17 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations .......................................... 76
Table 18 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ...................................... 80
Table 19 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for Extermal and Internal Outcomes ....................... 88
Table 20 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................... 89
Table 21 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ............................................................ 90
Table 22 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ......................................... 93

vii
Table 23 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ....................................................... 94

viii
List of Figures
Figure 1 Principals’ Knowledge and Motivation Influence and Organizational Context ........... 24
Figure 2 Participants’ Responses to Accountability for Principals .............................................. 67
Figure 3 Validated Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Gaps ........................................ 70
Figure 4 Principals’ Progress Toward Implementing Instructional Coaching .............................. 97

ix
Abstract
This study employed the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to evaluate the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting principals’ efforts toward
creating and implementing instructional coaching programs that promote equity. A qualitative
research process was designed and conducted using interviews of seven principals in one district
and documents from leadership meetings to collect data for analysis. The evaluation identified
gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational structures. Key findings showed that the
school district lacked policies, procedures, and tools for evaluating instructional coaching, which
was interpreted by stakeholders as a lack of value. Additionally, findings showed that principals
attributed the success and failure of instructional coaching to factors outside of their control.
Based on these results, content-specific recommendations were used to design an integrated
training program. These recommendations included the creation of an Equity Scorecard to
evaluate instructional coaching, schedules to prioritize important duties of instructional coaches,
and regular collaborative discussions among principals to validate their impact on instructional
coaching. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Model was used to develop
evaluative tools for this program at all four levels: reaction, knowledge, behavior, and outcomes.

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
The role of a principal is crucial to the success of a school and its students. Waters et al.
(2003) asserted that a substantial relationship exists between school leadership and student
achievement. Their meta-analysis of effective school leadership identified 21 key responsibilities
of principals. Among these are culture; knowledge of curriculum, instruction, and assessment;
monitoring; and evaluating programs (Waters et al., 2003). Billingsley et al. (2018) identified
additional responsibilities for principals who are leading effective, inclusive schools. These
added responsibilities are equity and cultural responsiveness as well as professional capacity of
school personnel (Billingsley et al., 2018). In an effort to assist with these leadership
responsibilities and ensure high quality instruction on school campuses, many school districts
have begun to use the instructional coach model as a form of ongoing professional development
and capacity building for teachers (Knight, 2007, 2011; Knight & van Niewerburgh, 2012;
Killion, 2012). Desimone and Pak (2016) showed instructional coaching is a highly effective
form of ongoing teacher professional development. Aguilar (2020) argued that instructional
coaches must engage in transformational conversations that promote equity to disrupt the
disparities in education experienced by racial minority students for years.
Despite this research supporting the practice of instructional coaching many barriers
persist preventing its effective implementation. Instructional coaches are content and pedagogy
experts who work to increase teachers’ use of high-yield instructional strategies, improve content
knowledge, and effectively implement district and campus initiatives (Gallucci et al., 2010).
While some coaches work solely with adult learners, others continue to serve as classroom
teachers. Instructional coaches are limited by three primary barriers: lack of clearly defined roles

2
(Knapp, 2017; Bertrand et al., 2015), inadequate training (Duncan & Stock, 2010; Mangin &
Dusmore, 2014), and not protecting time allocated for coaching and assignment of unrelated
responsibilities (Bertrand et al., 2015; McCombs & Marsh, 2009; Locke & McKenzie, 2014).
These obstacles hinder the effectiveness of instructional coaches and their ability to improve
teacher practices. This problem is important to address because there are calls for improving
student outcomes at the federal, state, and local level (Sharp, 2016). Students spend most of their
time in school with teachers and classroom instruction has the largest impact on student learning,
so highly trained teachers are more effective at producing quality student outcomes (Knapp,
2017; Bertrand et al., 2015; James-Ward & Abuyen, 2015; Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013).
Instructional coaches are in a unique position to have a significant impact on student learning.
This further highlights the need for evaluating the effective leadership and management of
instructional coaching programs.
Organizational Context and Mission
This dissertation research was conducted at a small independent school district in
southern Texas. For the purpose of confidentiality, the district is referred to as Pearl City
Independent School District (ISD). According to their website the mission of the district is to
“Educate, Engage, and Empower Each student for a life of Excellence.” Before 2013, Pearl City
Independent School District (ISD) had several schools labeled “Improvement Required” and
others that were digressing in producing high student achievement. The introduction of
instructional coaching to the district was an initiative to combat this phenomenon. Since then,
only one school remains with this label.
Pearl City ISD follows a schools of choice model and as such “students are aided by open
enrollment as well as the absence of school zones throughout the district” and transportation is

3
available for all students. In an effort to reach their teaching and learning objective to
“implement viable and innovative curriculum and effective instructional programs that address
the needs of all learners”, the district sought and was selected to participate in The Texas Center
for Educator Excellence (TxCEE) grant focusing on the practice and effect of instructional
coaching on teachers’ practice and student outcomes. Because of this opportunity, campus
learning facilitators and instructional coaches are present on most of the campuses in the district.
Additionally, teachers are required to obtain a minimum of 30 hours of professional development
each year.
The district consists of six elementary schools, three middle schools, one high school, and
one alternative school. As noted on their website, the district serves roughly 7,000 students. The
largest population of students are Hispanic, an equal percentage are black and white students,
and a small percentage of students are Asian/Pacific Islander. Additionally, 75% of the student
population lives below the poverty line. Most teachers in the district do not live below the
poverty line and do not experience the same social and economic disparities of the students they
teach. Aguilar (2020) asserted that instructional coaches have the important task of prompting
and challenging teachers to employ equitable instructional practices. Additionally, Hammond
(2014) suggested instructional coaches help bridge the social and cultural gap between teachers
and their students by promoting and supporting the use of culturally responsive instruction.
Organizational Goal
One performance goal for Pearl City ISD in its effort to achieve its mission of “Educate,
Engage, and Empower Each student for a life of Excellence” is to provide professional learning
opportunities to teachers that are relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing by the end of the
2019-20 school year (District Innovation Plan, 2017). This goal was created by a district

4
innovation team that is composed of district administrators, a teacher representative from each
school, staff members from the police and maintenance departments, community representatives,
and a district parent. The purpose of this goal was s to increase teacher capacity to improve
learning outcomes for the diverse student population living in poverty. Progress toward
achieving this goal was tracked through a campus professional learning calendar as well as
observations of teachers’ use of provided instructional strategies in the classroom.
Related Literature
The diverse populations of students in K-12 schools has drastically increased (GLSEN,
2015; Bainbridge & Lasley, 2002) and so has the need for culturally responsive and equitable
instructional practices (Mikulyuk & Braddock, 2018; Hammond, 2014). There are clear and
substantial disparities in education that exist for minority and underserved student populations; at
the same time, researchers suggest measures that can mitigate this phenomenon (Cramer et al.,
2014; Toomey, et al., 2012) and also highlight the benefits of diversity on school campuses
(Mikulyuk & Braddock, 2018). One of these strategies is instructional coaching.
Instructional coaching has become a popular method for providing ongoing professional
development for teachers, as well as a method by which campus leadership duties can be
distributed (Desimone & Pak, 2016; Knight & van Nieuwerburgh, 2012; Spilane, 2005). This
trend is due, in part, to the increase in educational accountability measured primarily by student
outcomes (Stecher & Kirby, 2004). While some research disputes the efficiency of distributive
leadership (Wright, 2008) most schools have adopted it in some form or another (Spillane,
2005).
Jim Knight (2007) described how instructional coaching in schools began with a focus on
literacy coaching but has now been expanded to several different models. He also highlighted 10

5
years of research, conducted by Pathways to Success and the Kansas University Center for
Research on Learning, that showed the effectiveness of instructional coaching in a typical urban
school district. Additionally, Hattie, et al. (2017) compared the usefulness of instructional
strategies using effect sizes with 0.40 being an average effect. This study listed instructional
coaching as one the highest results yielding strategies for teachers to engage in. In their meta-
analysis, the effect size of coaching on student outcomes was 0.62. (Hattie, et al., 2017).
There are several common forms of coaching: executive coaching, coactive coaching,
cognitive coaching, literacy or reading coaching, and instructional coaching (Jim Knight, 2007).
Killion (2012) offered 10 roles of the instructional coaches: resource providers, data coaches,
curriculum specialists, instructional specialists, mentors, classroom supporter, learning
facilitator, school leader, change catalyst, and learner.
The primary role of instructional coaches on a school campus is determined by the
campus administrator. Principals’ leadership is critical in fostering positive culture among
teachers, staff and students. Leithwood, et al. found that “the effect of leadership is second only
to classroom instruction among all school-related factors that contribute to what students learn at
school” (p. 7). Principals are accountable for improving student learning, and as such it is
important to evaluate how principals’ leadership affect the successful enactment of instructional
coaching on school campuses (Lee, et al., 2012).
Importance of the Evaluation
Effective instructional coaching and ongoing professional development is important for
the success of each campus and thereby all students (Knight, 2007; Killion, 2012). Spark (2010)
found accountability for schools and the need for teacher improvement calls for this issue to be
addressed. Additionally, Desimone and Pak (2016) found that ongoing professional development

6
in the form of instructional coaching can be a highly effective form of teacher professional
development. Principals have the authority to ensure the factors that enable effective
instructional coaching are present on their campuses (Lee, et al., 2012), yet, as stated before,
many obstacles still persist (Knapp, 2017; Bertrand, et al., 2015; Duncan & Stock, 2010; Mangin
& Dusmore, 2014; Bertrand, et al., 2015; McCombs & Marsh, 2009; Locke & McKenzie, 2014).
If these obstacles are left unsolved by school principals, coaches will continue to be ill-equipped
to improve teacher practices and thus student learning (Brown, et al., 2017; McCombs & Marsh,
2009).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
One performance goal for Pearl City ISD in its effort to achieve its mission of “Educate,
Engage, and Empower Each student for a life of Excellence” is to provide professional learning
opportunities for teachers that are relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing by the end of the
2019-20 school year. The stakeholders for this research were Pearl City ISD campus principals,
instructional coaches, and teachers. Principals provide the context in which instructional
coaching is implemented. Principals are also responsible for evaluating instructional coaches and
teachers, but principals can be limited in their content expertise. Coaches provide professional
learning and development for teachers. Coaches also provide resources, model lessons, and in
some cases work one on one with teachers in need of assistance. Coaches have no authority to
officially evaluate teachers and are limited by confidentiality to not disclose teacher practices to
administrators. Teacher use the resources and training to improve their instructional practices
which improves student academic outcomes. There is a great deal of autonomy given to teachers
in their classrooms to choose which strategies to implement and since principals are limited in

7
the time they can devote to individual teachers; instructional coaches are essential in monitoring
teacher practices.

8
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Stakeholders for any school district are numerous. Among these groups are students,
parents, community partners, teachers, school staff, principals and campus leaders, and district
administrators. Pearl City ISD consisted of over 7,000 students, 11 principals, one
superintendent, one assistant superintendent, two executive directors, and numerous district
coordinators. Beyond district leadership, each campus has principals, assistant principals,
campus learning leaders, campus learning facilitators, instructional coaches, grade level team
leaders, and content department chairs. Each of these groups play a significant role in the district
meeting its ultimate goal of educating and ensuring equity for its students.
Conducting a complete analysis would include all stakeholder groups, but for the purpose
of this study, the focus was on principals. Principals were selected because they have the most
control over the constraints in which instructional coaching and professional learning is enacted.
Principals are in charge of creating clear roles and responsibilities for coaches, providing them
with relevant professional development and protecting their time to practice instructional
coaching on the school campus. If the principals’ goal is not achieved, instructional coaches will
be ineffective and teacher practices will not be improved, causing stagnation and in worst cases a
decline in student academic outcomes. Table 1 includes the organizational mission and goal of
Pearl City ISD as well as performance goals for principals, instructional coaches, and teachers.

9
Table 1

Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals

Organizational Mission
The mission of Pearl City ISD is to educate, engage and empower each student for a life of excellence.
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of the 2019-20 school year, Pearl City ISD will provide relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing
professional learning opportunities for teachers.
Principals Instructional Coaches Teachers
By the end of the 2019-2020 school
year, principals will create and
implement a comprehensive program
that supports instructional coaches in
establishing equitable instructional
practices.

By the end of the 2019-2020 school
year, instructional coaches will
provide teachers with research based
instructional strategies and complete
the coaching cycle with 50% of the
teachers.
By the end of the 2019-2020 school
year, teachers will utilize 75% of the
given instructional strategies and
produce evidence of improved
student outcomes.

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which Pearl City ISD is meeting
its goal of providing relevant, effective, evaluated, and ongoing professional learning
opportunities for teachers. The analysis focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences related to principals effectively leading and integrating instructional coaches in
establishing equitable instructional practices. While a complete performance evaluation would
focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis
is campus principals.
The questions guiding this study are the following:

10
1. What are the principals’ knowledge and motivation related to creating and implementing
a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable
instructional practices?
2. What is the interaction between Pearl City ISD’s culture and context and principals’
knowledge and motivation to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that
supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources related to creating and implementing a
comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable
instructional practices?
Methodological Framework
This study utilized a modified and focused version of Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
that considers knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on meeting performance
goals. While the Clark and Estes model is broad as it encompasses an entire organization and all
of its stakeholders, this study focused solely on principals as its primary stakeholders and
identified factors that affect their ability to achieve the districts’ performance goal. This study is
qualitative in nature since it is intended to understand context and process as it is observed in the
natural setting of the subjects (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; McEwan & McEwan, 2003). The
research focused on the meaning making process and contextual factors that affect principals and
their ability to meet the organizational goal of their school district which is to provide relevant,
effective, evaluated and ongoing professional learning opportunities for teachers. Additionally,
the sample size of campus principals is small with the Pearl City ISD, which makes qualitative
research the more effective method.

11
Definitions
Instructional coaches: Instructional coaches work with teachers to improve their instructional
practices. This could be a full-time position or lead teachers who are selected to support others in
their pedagogy.
Campus Administrators: Campus administrators are principals who are responsible for
overseeing an individual school campus in the district.
Professional Development: Professional development is learning designed to increase the
knowledge and skills of teachers. This could be through formal coursework, conferences,
workshops, or job-embedded support such as instructional coaching.
Educational Equity: Educational equity refers to the reduction of disparities in student
achievement based on factors such as race, gender, and economic background (Fischetti, 2018).
Equitable Instructional Practices: Teacher practices that ensure every child receives whatever
they need to develop to their full academic and social potential (Aguilar, 2020).
Social and Emotional Learning: Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) is the process through
which children and adults understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel
and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible
decisions (Collaborative for Academic Social and Emotional Learning, 2020).
Culturally Responsive Teaching: Culturally responsive teaching (CRT) includes recognizing and
using students' cultural identity, knowledge, and methods of meaning making to effectively
scaffold their processing of new information (Hammond, 2015).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about instructional coaching in

12
K-12 public schools. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders and the framework for
the project were also introduced in this chapter. Chapter Two is a review of the literature and
introduction of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analytical framework and associated KMO
influences embedded within the conceptual framework. Chapter Three details the knowledge,
motivation and organizational elements to be examined as well as methodology for choice of
participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and
analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived
gaps as well as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

13
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
School districts across the country are constantly looking for ways to improve teacher
practices and student outcomes. Laws such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESSA) have been passed on the federal level to ensure that districts and schools
continue this work. According to Darling-Hammond et al. (2004), “the broad goal of NCLB is to
raise the achievement levels of all students, especially underperforming groups, and to close the
achievement gap that parallels race and class distinctions” (p. 3). The issue of achievement gaps
and inequitable student outcomes is not an anomaly for any state or local education system.
Instructional coaching has been identified as means for improving both teacher practice and
student outcomes (Hattie, et al., 2017; Killion, 2011; Knight, 2007).
Principals are responsible for overseeing the enactment of instructional coaching. The
roles, duties, and constraints placed on instructional coaches is based on the leadership at the
campus level. Therefore, this study explores what knowledge, motivational, and organizational
factors influence principals’ role of overseeing the successful implementation of instructional
coaching on their campus.
This literature review examined the root causes of gaps in the implementation of
instructional coaching on K-12 campuses. The review begins with general research on the
importance of principals as instructional leaders on their campuses and the concept of
distributive leadership. This is followed by an overview of literature on the importance of
instructional coaching as a form of professional development to improve teacher practice. The
review presents an in-depth discussion on instructional coaching practices and characteristics of
excellent instructional coaches. This section includes current research on teacher preparation and
professional development practices that promote equity in the U.S. Following the general

14
research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
and, specifically, knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on principals’ ability
support and conducive environments for instructional coaches to promote equitable instructional
practices.
Influences on Principals and Instructional Coaching
This section highlights key influences that affect principals and instructional coaching in
K-12 schools. The discussion will begin with principals and the concept of distributive
leadership. Next, the practice of instructional coaching will be examined. Lastly, increasing
diversity in schools and the need for culturally responsive instruction and practices that produce
equitable outcomes for students will be addressed.
Effective Principals and Distributive Leadership in K-12 Education
Principals are the leaders of school campuses. They are ultimately responsible for the
teachers they supervise, and the students serviced on their campus. This section discusses the
accountability of principals to their stakeholders as well as developing models of leadership that
are occurring on K-12 campuses in the United States.
Effective Principals
The role of principal has grown increasingly complex in recent years (Desravines,
Aquino, & Fenton, 2016). To be effective principals must be able to lead campuses where
students are safe, teachers engage in continuous learning, and student achievement is improved
while meeting all local, state, and federal compliance issues with regards to safety, legality, and
academic performance. Martin et al. (2016) suggested that effective principals master 12
competencies: developing trusting relationships; leading in the realization of the vision; making
shared decisions; communicating effectively; resolving conflict and issues; motivating and

15
developing others; managing group processes; supporting others with appropriate leadership
style; using power ethically; creating and managing a positive culture and climate; initiating
change; and evaluating student, personnel, and program performance.
Additionally, Waters et al. (2003) found that student achievement is closely
related to principal leadership. Principals are responsible for the culture and instructional
leadership of the campus (Billingsley et al., 2018; Martin et al., 2017; Waters et al. 2003).
Effective leaders are knowledgeable of campus culture; curriculum, instruction, and assessment;
and monitoring and evaluating programs (Waters et al., 2003). Promoting equity, cultural
responsiveness, and professional capacity of school personnel is an important component of
effective school leadership (Billingsley et al., 2018). Freire (1990) asserted that the duty of
public education is to end the oppression of marginalized students. Educational leaders are
among the distinctive stakeholders tasked with promoting equity for diverse student learners
(Green, 2016). Theoharis and Scalan (2015) described the necessity for school leaders to take a
primary role in drastically changing how campuses address the needs of diverse learners
including through inclusivity.
Principals and Accountability
Accountability in education is not a new concept. Recent reforms focus more closely on
student outcomes than in the past and place primary responsibility for these results on campus
principals. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 required that all students be proficient in both
reading and mathematics (No Child Left Behind [NCLB], 2002). The basis for this proficiency is
measured by standardized tests that are created and administered at the state level. Funding for
public schools was connected to the achievement of students on these assessments. Under this
law, schools that do not reach Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) can be closed or taken over by

16
state agencies (NCLB, 2002). This layer of accountability is added to the responsibility of
maintaining safe schools, promoting positive culture, fostering professional growth among staff,
and a myriad of other duties that are incumbent upon principals to fulfill.
Much consideration has been given to campus leaders, the various roles they take on, and
their impact on school campuses. Principals’ leadership styles have a major impact on student
outcomes. Lee et al. (2012) found the culture and climate of a school is inextricably tied to the
leadership of the campus principal. When teachers perceived their principal as a learning and
professional leader, they were more likely to focus on their own professional growth. This
positive outlook of teachers was in direct response to the leaders and led to positive student
outcomes.
Evolving Models of Distributive Leadership
Due to the growing responsibilities of principals to act as both managerial and
instructional leaders, many schools have begun to distribute leadership amongst campus staff.
Spillane (2005) described distributive leadership as the product of the interaction between school
leaders. The staples of distributive leadership are shared responsibility, shared power and
authority, synergy, leadership capacity, organizational learning, and equitable and ethical
climate, a democratic and investigative culture, and macro-community engagement (Dean,
2007). Positions such as assistant principals, deans of instruction, curriculum specialists,
department and team leaders, and instructional coaches were created to assist principals in
managing the increasing amount of responsibilities.
In theory, distributive leadership offers professional learning communities and
collaboration for teachers. The former hierarchical paradigm shifts to a shared responsibility,
where subgroups are given authority to act collectively, collaboratively, or in coordination to

17
achieve the common goal of the school (Spillane, et al., 2000). Principals who follow the
distributed leadership model seek to build capacity and increase involvement of staff to shape the
culture, climate, and success of the school.
Growing Racial and Gender Diversity in K-12 Schools
As K-12 schools become more racially diverse, gaps in educational outcomes persist.
Smith and Harper (2015) confirmed that Black students, particularly those in southern states,
were suspended or expelled at disproportionately higher rates than other students. Additionally,
research has suggested that this reality has a negative long-term impact on Black students. Many
researchers suggest that these disciplinary actions lead to higher dropout rates, lower college
attendance, and entry into the juvenile justice system (Losen, et al., 2015; Balfanze, et al., 2014;
Marchbanks, et al., 2015; Gregory, et al., 2010).
Despite the creation of programs and legislation, the achievement gaps based on race still
persist in education (Robinson, 2016; Reardon, 2013). Several causes for these gaps have been
identified and include economic inequality, racial density of schools, geographical region of
schools, and household education levels (Hung et al., 2020, Reardon, 2013; Bainbridge &
Lasley, 2002). Ford and Moore (2013) highlighted gaps in educational outcomes including lower
graduation rates, test scores, low representation in gifted programs, and excessively high
identification in special education programs (Ford, 2013; Moore & Owens 2008; Jackson &
Moore, 2006).
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ) students experience
disparities in educational experiences. Heteronormativity is so pervasive in schools that bullying,
and harassment of students based on their nonconforming to gender roles has become an
expected occurrence (GLSEN, 2015). LGBTQ students experience harassment and bullying at

18
alarmingly higher rates than straight students. In a 2012 study that included thousands of
California middle schools, researchers found that gay, bisexual, and queer (GBQ) males
experienced three times as much harassment as straight males, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual
(LGB) females experienced bullying at a rate five times greater than straight females (Toomey et
al., 2012).
LBGTQ students experience lower rates of academic success than their heterosexual
counterparts. Sexual minority students have fewer positive experiences at school including
negative attitudes about school and lower grade point averages (GPAs). Russel et al. (2001)
found that in addition to less positive attitudes about school, sexual minority girls and bisexual
boys report lower GPAs than their heterosexual counterparts. LGB students with little home and
school support were identified as highly vulnerable. These students are likely to have difficulty
in school including a low sense of belonging, victimization, and low GPAs (Murdock & Bolch,
2005).
Diversity in K-12 schools has a positive effect on student outcomes. Kurlander and Yun
(2005) found that students from multiracial schools had more positive racial attitudes than
students in racially isolated schools. The results of a study conducted by Mikulyuk and Braddock
(2018) suggested that “increased K-12 diversity has positive societal-level benefits, in terms of
increasing intergroup social cohesion, potentially leading to reductions in intergroup prejudices,
opening up more equitable opportunities to learn.” (p.30)
Teacher Practices and Promoting Equity
A particular need has arisen around pedagogy that promotes equity amongst diverse
student populations and assists with closing the achievement gap for marginalized populations.
Teachers play a critical role in this process as they are on the front line with students every day

19
in their classrooms. Recently, instructional practices that promote equity have been published
and disseminated. Teachers on highly diverse campuses have a particular interest in promoting
equity in access, student learning, and outcomes.
Instructional Practices that Promote Equity
Due to increased diversity among students, much research has been conducted on
instructional practices that promote racial equity in the classroom. The disparities in education
for Black students has been well researched and documented. Recently, however, models for
equitable and cultural responsive instruction for all learners have been developed to promote
access and equity for Black and Hispanic students. The Integrated Learning Model created by
Cramer, et al.(2014) expanded on the work of Gay (2002, 2010) and Frattura and Capper (2006)
to include equity for at-risk students. The four tenets of this model are: focusing on equity of
environments, establishing equitable, diverse, and interdependent communities of learners,
implementing change through critical cultural consciousness, and providing access to
multicultural curriculum with culturally congruent instructional strategies (Cramer, et al., 2014).
Sustainable models such as this have been implemented by principals in an effort to promote
equity on their campuses. Rubel (2017) focused on four types of equitable instruction specific to
mathematics; (a) teaching for understanding; (b) fostering multidimensional participation; (c)
connecting mathematics content to students’ experiences; and (d) providing opportunities for
using mathematics to read and write. Ultimately, instruction that promotes equity starts with
teachers’ mindsets and view of the world (Aguilar, 2020; Rubel, 2017). Teachers must
continuously reflect and acknowledge bias in their emotions, experiences, and behaviors
(Aguilar, 2020).

20

Social Emotional Learning
Social and emotional learning (SEL) is the process through which children and adults
understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for
others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions (Casel,
2012). This framework consists of five competencies: self-awareness, self-management, social
awareness, relationship skills, responsible decision making. Schools incorporate SEL as a means
to create an equitable learning environment through evidence-based practices that actively
involve all students in their social, emotional, and academic growth (Casel, 2012). Merrell &
Gueldner (2010) found that the effective SEL programs Identify the needs and resources
available to the school; identify goals of students; assess school programs; match programs that
best fit the school; identify resources to sustain the programs implementation on the campus.
your school.
Instructional Coaching as Professional Development
Professional development has long been a key to improving practice for educators. A
typical training session can last from three hours to several days. Research suggests, however,
that there were large disparities in the implementation of knowledge and skills acquired from
these traditional settings than when ongoing professional development took place on site.
Instructional coaching provides work-embedded professional development for teachers and
increases the likelihood that learned strategies will be implemented with fidelity.
History of Instructional Coaching
In recent years the interest in instructional coaching as an answer to the call for improved
teaching practices has grown. The concept studied in the UK initially began with tenured

21
teachers becoming mentors for their colleagues. While benefits of the method could be measured
and observed, the term instructional coach remained ambiguous. In 2005, the Centre for the Use
of Research and Evidence in Education (CUREE) created the National Framework for Mentoring
and Coaching (CUREE, 2005). Three categories branched from this research including
mentoring, specialist coaching, and collaborative coaching. Based on additional literature from
Creasy and Paterson (2005) that clearly favored non-directive approaches to instructional
coaching, CUREE developed training materials specifically addressing mentoring skills.
Instructional coaching has now become a method for ongoing campus professional
development in K-12 school in the United States. Effective professional development includes
five features: content focus, active learning, duration, collective participation, and coherence
(Main & Pendergast, 2015). Desimone and Pak (2016) argued that instructional coaching is a
high-quality form of professional development because it fulfills all key features of effective
teacher learning. Additionally, Knight and van Nieuwerburgh (2012) found that instructional
coaching mitigated the reluctance of teachers to employ evidence based instructional strategies.
Instructional Coaching Practices
Through the years of research, five models have emerged that categorize instructional
coaching: instructional, technical, content, cognitive, and peer coaching (Killion & Harrison,
2017; Killion, et al., 2012). Because of the varying types of coaching, it is incumbent upon
district and campus administrators to be clear about the type of coaching offered. Instructional
coaches assist teachers through planning, co-teaching, modeling lessons, creating assessments,
and provoking reflecting thinking about teacher’s instructional choices. They typically follow a
gradual release model since the ultimate goal is to have teachers self-reflect on their own
practices. Technical coaching is useful when the goal is fidelity in implementing a particular

22
strategy or program. These coaches support teachers in very specific areas such as higher order
questioning or the implementation of a new reading program. Content coaches support teacher
based on grade level curriculum. Cognitive coaching relies on a coaches’ ability to assist
teachers in being reflective. Coaches use questioning strategies and probing so that teachers can
come to their own conclusions and produce the best results. Peer coaching is similar to team
collaboration. Teachers come together and learn from each other by sharing their experiences.
Similar to the various styles, purposes of instructional coaching can differ between campuses
and districts (Gallucci, et al., 2010). Coaches can be positioned as district-level personnel or be
campus based (Norton, 2001). Principals and districts determine the role and responsibilities of
coaches (Mangin & Dunsmore, 2014). Some districts hire instructional coaches to serve as
teacher mentors; improving teachers’ content knowledge and use of high-yield instructional
strategies. Contrastly, districts use instructional coaches as liaisons who serve only to promote a
district or campus (Gallucci,et al. , 2010).
Characteristics of Excellent Instructional Coaches
Experts in instructional coaching have developed key characteristics that support the
effective implementation of instructional coaching. Knight (2011) described good instructional
coaches as having a wealth of content knowledge for a particular subject area as well
understanding of effective instructional practices. Additionally, Knight (2011) suggested that for
coaches to partner with and grow teachers, they must be emotionally intelligent. Other experts in
the area of instructional coaching outline seven partnership principles that enhance the practice:
equality, choice, voice, reflection, dialogue, praxis, and reciprocity (Killion, et al., 2002).
Killion, et al. (2012) built on this research and suggested beliefs, teaching expertise,
coaching skills, relationship skills, content expertise, and leadership skills are characteristics of

23
good instructional coaches. This research focused on the interpersonal skills that are necessary
for developing meaningful working relationships between coaches and teachers. Instructional
coaches can also solicit feedback from principals and teachers to continuously grow in their roles
on campus.
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework
An organization must first identify its strengths and weaknesses before determining
future goals and plans. Clark and Estes (2008) established a gap analysis framework that is
essential in identifying gaps in meeting organizational and stakeholder performance goals.
According to this framework, three influences must be examined: knowledge, motivation, and
organizational context. A modified version of Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis was used as
the conceptual framework for this research.
The conceptual framework for this study focuses on conceptual and procedural
knowledge (Rueda, 2011). Utility value and attribution are the types of motivations discussed
(Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). Finally, both cultural models and
settings for the organization are examined (Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001). While each of
these influences are organized independently, it is important to recognize that they interact
seamlessly with each other in an organization. For instance, a principals’ motivation to
successfully implement instructional coaching is highly dependent on the culture of the district to
support that effort.
Figure 1 represents factors that could potentially help principals meet the goal set by district
administration. The mission of Pearl City ISD is to “Educate, Engage and Empower Each student
for a life of excellence.” It is each principals’ role to carry out this mission on their campus. One
performance goal stemming from the district’s mission is to provide relevant, effective,

24
evaluated and ongoing professional learning opportunities for teachers. To reach this goal
requires intentional training and development of educators. The district has attempted to aid
principals in this feat by procuring TxCEE grant funds specifically for instructional coaching to
occur on each campus.
Figure 1
Principals’ Knowledge and Motivation Influences and Organizational Context

While principals have a great deal of autonomy in regard to how they run their individual
campus, they must still operate under the guidelines and constraints of district leadership.

Attribution
Principals should feel that
effective implementation of
instructional coaching is due to
their own organizational and
leadership efforts.
Utility Value
Principals need to see the value of
instructional coaching on
improving pedagogical practices
of teachers.
Conceptual Knowledge
Principals need knowledge
of effective professional
development and training
for instructional coaches.
Procedural Knowledge
Principals need to
define the roles, duties,
and schedules of
instructional coaches.
Conceptual Knowledge
Principals need to know the
most effective practices for
instructional coaching
implementation.
Cultural Model
Pearl City ISD should promote a culture of accountability
for principals on the effective implementation of
instructional coaching to support equitable instructional
practices.
Cultural Model
Pearl City ISD should promote the value of instructional
coaching as a means of improving teacher in equitable
instructional practices.
Cultural Setting
Pearl City ISD should have policies that support
effective instructional coaching.
Cultural Setting
Pearl City ISD should have a tool to evaluate the
effectiveness of instructional coaching.
By the end of the 2019-
2020 school year,
principals will create and
implement a
comprehensive program
that supports instructional
coaches in establishing
equitable instructional
practices.

25
Principals are accountable to the superintendent for their leadership at their schools. They are
also responsible for ensuring the district’s missions and goals are being met on their campus.
Lee, et al. (2012) contended that the principal is responsible for setting and fostering the culture
of a school campus. In order to create a culture of accountability for instructional coaching,
principals must first have basic knowledge of what instructional coaching is, how it is most
effectively enacted, as well as the benefits it yields in improving teacher practice and increasing
student achievement (Killion, et al., 2012; Knight, 2007). Once principals have a basic
understanding of the positive impact instructional coaching can have on their campus and a sense
of the significance their leadership yields, their motivation to ensure it is effectively implemented
on their campus should increase. These influences are be discussed in detail in the following
section.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Principals are subject to influences that can impede or support their ability to achieve
their performance goals. These influences are in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. Each of these influences are discussed below with regards to
principals’ meeting their performance goal in Pearl City ISD.
Knowledge and Skills
This section reviews relevant research focusing on the knowledge and skills that are
pertinent for principals in Pearl City ISD in order to achieve their stakeholder goal. The
performance goal for principals is to create and implement a program for the holistic
implementation of effective instructional coaching by the end of the 2019-20 school year. Much
research has been devoted to the practice of instructional coaching but there is a need to focus on
the context in which coaching is enacted. This need stems from constant calls for the

26
improvement of teacher pedagogy and school accountability (Sharp, 2016) as well as research
suggesting that instructional coaching can be a highly effective form of teacher professional
development (Desimone & Pak, 2016).
Principals must be able to apply their knowledge in order to meet their performance
goals. Dyer, et al. (2011) described how the identification of root causes is critical to promoting
effective organizational change. This process is crucial as it prevents wasting time, energy, and
resources on misidentified problems. Clark and Estes (2008) described a process of gap analysis
pertinent for diagnosing organizational problems for continued improvement. It is crucial to
identify whether stakeholders possess the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the goals of the
organization. The first step towards achieving both the organizational and stakeholder goals for
Pearl City ISD is to identify knowledge influences, knowledge types, and methods to assess for
existing gaps. Knowledge influences include facts, procedures, strategies and concepts and serve
as an element of learning (Mayer, 2011). Principals need knowledge of effective instructional
coaching strategies, the coaching cycle, as well as the effects instructional coaching can have on
a campus.
Principals must possess certain knowledge and skills to effectively run their schools and
reach the organizational and stakeholder goals. Rueda (2011) identified three types of
knowledge: factual, conceptual, and procedural. Knowledge for specific contexts such as
terminology, specific details, and foundational information is factual knowledge (Rueda, 2011).
Knowledge focused on concepts, theories, categories, and models for the purpose of
understanding is recognized as conceptual knowledge (Rueda, 2011). Procedural knowledge is
understanding how to complete a task and its application (Rueda, 2011). Krathwohl (2002)

27
proposed a fourth knowledge influence, which is metacognitive knowledge. Metacognition is the
awareness of thought and knowing one’s own cognition (Krathwohl, 2002).
Based on a review of current and relevant research, knowing effective research-based
practices for instructional coaching implementation, defining roles and responsibilities of
instructional coaches, and determining effective training and professional development for
instructional coaches have been identified as the three knowledge influences affecting principals
in Pearl City ISD. The factors are discussed based on categorization as one of the four
knowledge types (factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive). Each knowledge type
corresponds with a set of possible assessment types. These assessments, along with aligned
research, can be used to examine the stakeholder’s capacity to reach their goal.
Knowing Effective Research-Based Practices for Instructional Coaching Implementation
The first knowledge influence that principals need to in order to create and implement a
program supporting instructional coaching is knowing the most effective practices for
instructional coaches. This knowledge influence is declarative (conceptual) since its emphasis is
on identifying best practices. The successful enactment of any position must begin with the
implementation of effective strategies. Principals play a critical role in promoting successful and
transformational change on school campuses (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Lee, et al., 2012).
Instructional coaches have become popular on school campuses as a means of distributing
leadership responsibilities (Lockwood, et al., 2010). Principals, however, maintain the role as
director and are primarily held accountable for the success of all campus initiatives (Dubnick,
2014; Lee, et al., 2012; Stecher & Kirby, 2004). With that in mind, it is important for principals
to understand best practices for instructional coaches.

28
Often in education, strategies and interventions are implemented based on their
popularity and acceptance without credible research to validate them (Kirschner & van
Merrienboer, 2013; Pashler, et al., 2008) The use of research based practices in education is
significant in that it reduces the reliance on faulty assumptions and increases the chances of
successful interventions (Marsh, 2012). Since principals are the leaders of their campuses, it is
their responsibility to be as knowledgeable as possible of current research-based practices in
education.
An examination of effective research-based strategies for the implementation of
instructional coaching must be conducted to improve chances of success. Principals must
recognize the importance of research in selecting strategies to be used by instructional coaches.
Principals were asked to identify effective practices of instructional coaches as well as
scheduling conducive for instructional coaching. Research suggests that effective instructional
coaches engage teachers on a cycle for constant improvement (Killion, et al., 2012). This
includes pre-meetings with teachers to establish goals, observing classroom interactions, sharing
data from observations, and allowing teachers to reflect on that data. Schools with principals who
know and understand this cycle have coaches and teachers who are more likely to engage in the
process with fidelity (Teemant, 2013, Neuman & Wright, 2010; Cornet & Knight, 2009).
Define Roles and Responsibilities of Instructional Coaches
The second knowledge influence needed by principals to achieve their performance goal
is to define the roles, duties, and schedules of instructional coaches in their schools. This requires
procedural knowledge since principals must understand the performance tasks of instructional
coaching. Development of roles and assigning responsibilities is imperative to maximize the
effects of instructional coaches on a school campus.

29
Without clear guidance from administrators, instructional coaches can find themselves
lost in the daily shuffle of busy school life and confused about where they fit in. Walkowiak
(2016) suggested that there should be collaboration between principals, instructional coaches,
and teachers in development of roles and responsibilities. Doing so helps alleviate confusion and
frustration for all parties. Further evidence suggests that principals can positively influence
opportunities for change through instructional coaching by providing a clear vision for
instructional coaches. In a case study of two schools examined by Bertrand, et al., (2015),
researchers found that teachers were more likely to embrace the role of instructional coaches on
campuses where the principal gave clear explanations of the purpose and importance of
coaching.
Protecting the time of instructional coaches is fundamental in ensuring their success.
Principals can help improve the effects of instructional coaches by allocating and protecting the
time for coaching to take place. Bertrand, et al. (2015) completed a case study of six low
performing middle schools. On one campus, the instructional coaches’ schedules were
intentionally adjusted to allow more frequent planning time with teachers. Instructional coaches
on the other campuses were limited to meeting with teachers once a week. The study showed that
teachers who met more frequently with instructional coaches were twice as likely to make
changes to their instructional practices. In another study of middle school instructional coaches,
Lockwood et al. (2010) found that only 15% of instructional coaches reported spending 30% or
more of their time working one on one with teachers; this was 20% less than the district’s goal of
50%. In many cases, instructional coaches are pulled from their campuses for district meeting
and others are frequently used as substitute teachers (Locke & McKenzie, 2014). Roles,
responsibilities, and schedules must be created by principals to achieve their stakeholder

30
performance goal. Principals must recognize the importance of developing duties and schedules
for instructional coaches.
Determine Effective Training and Professional Development for Instructional Coaches
The third knowledge influence that principals need to achieve their performance goal is
knowing the most effective professional development and training for instructional coaches. This
influence is conceptual knowledge as it requires principals to understand the purpose and needs
of instructional coaches. Duncan and Stock (2010) found that instructional facilitators expressed
a need for mentoring and additional training for their position. This training should also be
carefully aligned to the district’s goal and vision for instructional coaching because coaches rely
on training to guide their enactment of coaching even when doing so is in contradiction to district
or campus goals (Mangin & Dunsmore, 2014). Mangin and Dunsmore (2014) noted that coaches
referenced the training they had received as the main influence on their beliefs and practices.
Hopkins, et al. (2017) found that training provided by districts can aid instructional coaches in
gaining an understanding of the district’s vision and how they fit into the vision.
Alignment of professional development and training to the established roles and goals of
instructional coaches is vital. Most instructional coaches have proven success as classroom
teachers but working well with students does not always translate to working well with adult
learners (Knight 2007; Killion, et al., 2012; Teemant, 2013). Therefore, it is important that the
training needs of instructional coaches be taken into consideration. Instructional coaches stated
that they noticed a shift in their views based on the training they had received that made them
better able to make a connection with the direction in which the district was heading. While there
is no research which suggests the amount of training needed by instructional coaches, it is clear

31
that quality training aligned to school and district goals is one component necessary to provide
instructional coaches with tools to effect meaningful change on a campus.
Table 2 illustrates the organizational performance goal and stakeholder goal aligned to
the knowledge influences essential to meeting those goals. The table also identifies the
knowledge type and aligned assessment for determining gaps in stakeholder’s knowledge.

32
Table 2

Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessment for Analysis
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Principals need to know the most
effective practices for instructional
coaching implementation
Declarative Conceptual Principals will be asked how they
identify the needs of their teachers.

Principals will be asked to identify
effective strategies for instructional
coaching.
Principals need to define the roles, duties,
and schedules of instructional coaches
Procedural Principals will be asked to define
effective instructional coaching and
asked to describe the interaction
between instructional coaches and
teachers as well as a typical coaching
cycle.
Principals need knowledge of effective
professional development and training for
instructional coaches
Conceptual Principals will be asked to describe the
ways in which the district and their
campuses support instruction coaching.

Motivation
Motivation is the second of three critical factors that must be evaluated to analyze gaps in
achievement of performance goals. Motivation can be generally understood as a person’s desire
to do or accomplish something. It is the driving force behind an individual’s efforts to start and
complete a task (Mayer, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) described motivation as a psychological
process that influences the choice to work, persistence, and the mental investment towards
achieving a goal. Additionally, Eccles (2006) suggested that people need to feel that they and
their contributions are valuable to their organization.
This section focuses on three motivational constructs: utility value theory, attribution
theory, and goal orientation. Relevant research on these motivational theories, influences, and
their impact on principals in Pearl City ISD was explored. Each theory aligns with appropriate
methodology to assess the motivational influences of the stakeholder group.

33
Seeing the Value of Instructional Coaching on Improving Pedagogical Practices of Teachers
The first motivation theory affecting principals’ ability to create and implement a
comprehensive instructional coaching model is expectancy value theory. Eccles (2006) defined
utility value theory as the perceived importance or value a person associates with doing a task.
Utility value is the relative value of available options that support the goal including usefulness
of the task and opportunity cost (Eccles, 2006). According to Rueda (2011) a person is more
likely to persist in a task that is of great value. Additionally, individuals who believe in their
ability to successfully complete a task are more likely to apply their efforts.
In order to achieve their stakeholder goal, principals need to acknowledge the importance
of their role in creating a conducive environment for instructional coaching. Bertrand et al.
(2015) found that principals play a crucial role in constructing the educational environment for
instructional coaching to have the greatest impact. Principals must also recognize the value of
instructional coaching in meeting the goals of the school. Coaching has an increased likelihood
of success when it is supported and promoted by campus administrators (Mchenry, et al., 2017,
Teemant, 2013). Despite these outcomes, coaches are often used in roles that are not related to
their job description because of urgent needs, understaffing, or mismanagement of time and
personnel (Locke & McKenzie, 2014). The ability to acknowledge the importance of
instructional coaching and their role in its successful implementation provides principals
motivation to achieve their stakeholder goal.
Believing Effective Instructional Coaching is Due to Their Own Leadership Efforts
The second motivation influence affecting principals’ ability to achieve their stakeholder
goal is attribution. Anderman and Anderman (2006) describe attribution theory as the way
people develop causal beliefs based on their environment and personal factors. Weiner’s model

34
(1985) developed three dimensions that impact human behavior: locus, stability, and
controllability. These factors determine a person’s understanding of why things happen. Locus is
whether a cause is perceived as internal or external. (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Weiner,
1985). Stability is the perception of a cause as fixed or variable, while controllability refers to a
person’s perceived control or power over a cause (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Weiner, 1985).
Additionally, Weiner (1985) asserted that attributions do not have to be accurate to impact
behavior.
In order to achieve their stakeholder goal, principals should feel that effective
implementation of instructional coaching is due to their own organizational and leadership
efforts rather than the lack of ability of instructional coaches. Lee et al. (2012) suggested that
principals’ instructional leadership is a crucial factor in promoting achievement on a school
campus. Additionally, campuses where principals actively participate in mitigating issues
between instructional coaches and teachers are more likely to have better results (Brown, et al.,
2017; Bertrand, et al., 2015). Researchers also found that campuses with principals who promote
fidelity in instructional coaching throughout a campus are more likely to see improvement in
teacher practice (Mchenry, et al., 2017, Teemant, 2013).
Table 3 details the motivational influences. Additionally, this table identifies assessments to
evaluate motivational influences of the stakeholders.

35
Table 3

Motivational Influences and Assessments for Analysis
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivation Type Motivational Influence
Assessment
Principals need to see the value of
instructional coaching on improving
pedagogical practices of teachers.
Utility Value Principals will be asked to
describe the impact of
instructional coaching on their
campus.

Principals should feel that effective
implementation of instructional
coaching is due to their own
organizational and leadership efforts
rather than the lack of ability of
instructional coaches.
Attribution Principals will be asked in what
ways they support instructional
coaching.

Organizational Influences
The final gap analysis presented by Cark and Estes (2008) is organizational gaps. These
gaps can include processes and material resources. Schein (2004) compared the culture of an
organization to the personality of an individual. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) divide culture
into two separate but equal distinctions: cultural models and cultural settings. Models are
described as the unseen characteristics that define the culture of an organization whereas settings
refer to the visible practices that are in place in an organization (Gallimore and Goldenberg,
2001). Cultural influences can guide behavior and must therefore be studied in great detail to
determine the level to which it impacts meeting stakeholder performance goals (Schein, 2004;
Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Principals must be supported with the necessary resources but
also with a district culture that values accountability, equity, and the implementation of effective
instructional coaching.
Similar to any organization, there are challenges with accountability in Pearl City ISD.
This section focused on one cultural model: accountability, and two cultural settings. Relevant

36
research on these cultural theories, influences and their impact on principals in Pearl City ISD
was explored. Each model aligns with the setting to assess the cultural influences of the
stakeholder group.
Pearl City ISD’s Culture of Accountability for Principals
Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) defined accountability as the contractual relationship
between two parties through which a “director” seeks to ensure that a “provider” meets set
objectives. In this affiliation, the providers offer products or services while directors maintain the
power to reward, punish, or replace the provider. Principals need a culture of accountability
regarding instructional coaching to successfully meet their performance goal.
The goal in a managerial accountability model is productivity (Burk, 2004). On each
campus there are levels of managerial accountability. The ultimate goal of any school is to
improve academic outcomes for students (Blanton, et al., 2018; Hattie, et al., 2017; Bertrand, et
al., 2015). As providers, teachers are held responsible for the academic success of their students
(Fischetti, 2018). The campus principal acts as the director and evaluates the productivity of
teachers by tracking student growth on standardized assessments (Lee, et al., 2012). Teachers
who are successful at improving student outcomes are rewarded with yearly bonuses and
opportunities for promotion. Alternatively, teachers who are unsuccessful at improving student
performance are subject to probationary contract status or termination.
According to Burk (2004), agents act as experts in a professional accountability model. In
Pearl City ISD, teachers are expected to act as agents and use research based instructional
practices and interventions in their classrooms. To this end, instructional coaches are present on
each campus to provide ongoing professional development, model lessons, and offer
instructional support.

37
Pearl City ISD’s Promotion of the Value of Instructional Coaching
Organizations can emphasize or trivialize practices based on the value assigned to them.
Pearl City ISD needs to promote instructional coaching as a valuable practice for improving
equitable instructional practice and student outcomes. Principals need to recognize that
instructional coaching is valued by the district leadership for it to be focus on individual
campuses. It is well documented that K-12 education has gone through several reforms (Blanton,
et al., 2018; Ritter, 2018). The shifts can lead to practices being abandoned and new initiatives
not receiving much buy in from educators for a plethora of reasons (Rueda, 2011). On the
contrary, when an organization promotes the value of a certain practice, provides focused
attention, and encourages fidelity of its implementation, people within the organization are more
likely to participate in the task and accomplish the performance goal (Northouse, 2016).
Instructional coaching must be valued at the campus level in order for principals to meet
their performance goals. Historically, instructional coaching is more effective when teachers
perceive principals’ support for coaches and are involvement with instructional coaching
(Mchenry, et al., 2017, Teemant, 2013). As previously mentioned, valuing instructional coaching
at the organizational level can improve the likelihood of its successful enactment (Rueda, 2011).
Evidence of this value could be seen through the promotion of district and campus policies that
support instructional coaches.
Pearl City ISD’s Policies that Support Instructional Coaching
Organizational policies and practices are sometimes factors that impede stakeholder
groups from achieving a performance goal (Rueda, 2011). In addition to valuing instructional
coaching, Pearl City ISD must create policies that support instructional coaching. Doing so can
improve the perception and acceptance of instructional coaches by teachers (Bertrand, et al.,

38
2015). These policies should include defining roles (Walkowiak, 2016), protecting time to enact
instructional coaching (Locke & McKenzie, 2014), and providing beneficial professional
development (Hopkins et al., 2017; Mangin & Dusmore, 2014; Duncan & Stock, 2010).
Tool for Evaluating Effectiveness
The second cultural setting that influences principals meeting their performance goal is
having a tool with which to evaluate instructional coaching. The goal in a managerial
accountability model is productivity (Burk, 2004). Principals are directors and ensure high
quality instruction by regularly evaluating teachers’ pedagogy. Teachers are then punished or
rewarded through contract renewal or termination. While extensive grading rubrics exist for
teacher evaluation, no such tool exist in Pearl City ISD for the purpose of evaluating
instructional coaches.
The final step in Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework for analysis gaps in organizational
performance goals is to evaluate the outcomes. Instructional coaches are an investment for
districts and campuses, and as with any expenditure, there should be a way of assessing the
return on investment. This could be provided in part by the creation of a tool to evaluate
instructional coaches and their practice. Additionally, feedback from evaluative tools allows
principals and instructional coaches to engage in the continuous learning cycle. Table 4 details
the cultural model as well as aligned cultural setting influences of the stakeholder in order for
them to meet their performance goal.

39
Table 4

Organizational Cultural Models, Settings, and Influences
Assumed Cultural Influences Model or Settings Cultural Influence Assessment
Pearl City ISD should promote a
culture of accountability for
principals on the effective
implementation of instructional
coaching to support equitable
instructional practices.
Cultural Model Principal meetings with the
superintendent and campus
principals will be observed.
Principals will be asked to
provide agendas for principals’
meetings.
Pearl City ISD should promote the
value of instructional coaching as a
means of improving teachers in
equitable instructional practices.
Cultural Model Principal meetings with the
superintendent and campus
principals will be observed.

Agendas (document analysis)
from the 2019-2020 principals'
meetings were be analyzed for
frequency of discussion around
instructional coaching.
Pearl City ISD should have policies
that support effective instructional
coaching.
Cultural Setting Principals will be asked in what
ways does the district support
instructional coaching.
Pearl City ISD should have a tool to
evaluate the effectiveness of
instructional coaching.
Cultural Setting Principals will be asked to
provide a tool with which
instructional coaches are
evaluated.

40
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of this research is to understand the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational context that impact Pearl ISD principals in achieving their goal to create and
implement a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable
instructional practices. This study employed interviews and document analysis as data collection
tools. This chapter presents the research design and methods for data collection and analysis.
There were three questions guiding this qualitative study: (1) What are the principals’ knowledge
and motivation related to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports
instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices? (2) What is the interaction
between Pearl City ISD’s culture and context, and principals’ knowledge and motivation related
to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in
establishing equitable instructional practices? (3) What are the recommendations for
organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources
related to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional
coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices? This chapter provides a brief
description of the participating stakeholders followed by a discussion of the criteria and rationale
for the document analysis and interviews. Later, this chapter outlines the steps that were taken to
increase the credibility and trustworthiness of the research and my ethics as a researcher. Finally,
this chapter concludes with limitations of the research study.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population for this study consists of seven principals working in Pearl
City ISD. These administrators were on campuses where instructional coaching is enacted since

41
the purpose of the study is directly related to principals’ knowledge and motivation related to
supporting effective and equitable instructional coaching practices.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Principals Participating in this Study Must be Employed in Pearl City ISD
Because this study sought to explore the organizational supports and constraints of Pearl
City ISD in the enactment of effective and equitable instructional coaching practices, it was
imperative that the administrators interviewed be currently employed by and working at schools
in Pearl City ISD.
Criterion 2. Principals Participating in this Study Must Work on Campuses where
Instructional Coaching is Enacted
While administrators may have previous experience with and knowledge of instructional
coaching, this study sought to understand their knowledge and motivation related to the
instructional coaching that occurred in Pearl City ISD.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
This research sought to gain an in-depth understanding of the topic of principals’
knowledge and motivation of instructional coaching, which, according to Merriam and Tisdell
(2016), lends itself to purposeful sampling. Purposeful sampling requires a criterion for
participants that directly relates to the purpose and context of the study. The goal of this study
was to interview seven principals. Participants were recruited by e-mail requesting their
participation in the study.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The data collection methods for this research were interviews and document analysis.
The purpose of this study was to determine principals’ knowledge and motivation and related to

42
creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in
establishing equitable instructional practices and to explore how the organizational context of
Pearl City ISD impacts them. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggested that interviews are a
necessary form of data collection when feelings and thoughts cannot be directly observed.
Additionally, this research attempted to determine the interaction between Pearl City ISD’s
culture and principals’ knowledge and motivation to increase equitable instructional coaching
practices.
Interviews
Interview Protocol
The interview protocol used for this study was semi-structured. This type of interview
allows the researcher to flow flexibly through the interview questions as the respondents reveal
their understanding and perception of the topics (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviews were
used to address all of the influences related to the research questions. The questions were related
to principals’ knowledge and experience with instructional coaching, their perception of its
utility to promote equity in learning outcomes, and how supported they feel by the district
administration. Protocol for interviews can be found in Appendix A.
Interview Procedures
Interviews were conducted before or after school based on the availability of campus
administrators. All interviews were conducted using zoom since COVID-19 restricted in person
interviews. Each interview lasted between 40 mins and an hour. These interviews were recorded
and later transcribed to maximize accuracy during the analysis phase of this study.

43
Documents and Artifacts
Document analysis is a useful tool to triangulate data collected in qualitative leadership in
addition to adding credibility and minimizing bias (Bowen, 2009). For this research, meeting
agendas for the 2019-2020 school year were collected from principals’ meeting with district
administrators. These agendas were collected for the assistant superintendent of Pearl City ISD.
The meeting agendas for the 2019-2020 school year were analyzed for the frequency with which
instructional coaching, principal accountability, and other related subjects were scheduled to be
discussed. The protocol for analyzing documents in this study is found in Appendix B.
Data Analysis
Notes were taken during each interview to capture the initial interpretive thoughts based
on interviews responses. Thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data in relation to
the conceptual framework and research questions were documented in informal analytic memos.
Interviews were transcribed using features in zoom and saved on a password protected computer
between 24 to 48 hours after their completion.
During the initial analysis, an open coding system was used to interpret the responses. A
priori codes based on the conceptual framework were used to assess the data during the second
phase of the analysis. In the third phase of data analysis pattern codes and themes that emerge in
relation to the conceptual framework and study questions were identified. The frequency with
which each theme emerged in individual interview transcripts was tallied. Respondents responses
for each theme were calculated and converted into percentages to make data consumable.
Each agenda from administrators’ meeting was analyzed to determine the frequency that
topics related to conceptual framework of this study were addressed. Agenda items such as
instructional coaching, accountability, educational equity, and other related topics were

44
identified and tallied. These findings were compared to the responses to questions regarding
organizational influences of Pearl City ISD for accuracy.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To advance in any field of study it is imperative that research is conducted and related in
a credible and trustworthy manner (Meriam & Tisdell, 2016). Several methods were employed to
ensure the credibility and trustworthiness of the results of this study. The design of the study
included two methods of data collection interviews and document analysis. Data from these
sources were compared to confirm findings. The amount of campus administrators being
interviewed provided adequate engagement. Including as large a number of interviewees as
possible helped lead to saturation of one main theory and in some cases helped present an
alternative explanation than that presented in the literature review. Credibility as it relates to the
participants was also important in conducting research. For this purpose, although none
requested, respondents were offered transcriptions of their interviews and the interviewer’s
analysis of the conversation to ensure that it accurately described their perspective (Meriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Lastly, my integrity as a researcher was incredibly important to the
trustworthiness of this study. For this reason, my experience, role, and bias regarding the school
district were fully disclosed during the process of this study. Participants were reassured before
each interview of the purpose and how their responses would be utilized.
Ethics
Qualitative research relies heavily on the researcher, their choices, their ability to analyze
data, and use that data to answer the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
researcher must make ethical choices during this process. It is the responsibility of the researcher
to ensure the protection the identities of the organization and stakeholders, maximize the possible

45
benefits to the field of research, and determine who would be most beneficial to the research.
To ensure the safety of participants I submitted my study to the University of Southern
California Institutional Review Board (IRB) and followed all of their guidelines for protecting
the rights and welfare of the participants in this study. The organization and principals’ identities
were be protected by the use of pseudonyms. Principals were individually invited but not
required to participate in interviews. The researcher informed participants in e-mail and in face-
to-face zoom meetings of the purpose of the study. All data collected from interviews was stored
on a password protected computer. No participant was paid to participate in this study; however,
each participant did receive a thank you note at the conclusion of the study for their participation.
As an employee of Pearl City ISD, I am responsible for teaching mathematics on one of
the campuses in Pearl City ISD. I am the leader of the math department on my campus, however
none of the participants in this study are under my direct supervision. I have no authority,
evaluative role, or influence over the participants in this study. Although I interviewed my
principal, there was no power dynamic issue between the researcher and the participants and my
role on the campus did not impact his responses to the questions (Maxwell, 2013).
For a qualitative study, the researcher is the provider of data collection and analysis and
therefore it is imperative to explore any potential bias that may be present in the study (Meriam
& Tisdell, 2016). I am an employee in the district, and while I have been previously employed as
an instructional coach, I do not currently hold that position. While I have opinions of and
experience with instructional coaching, I have not worked with any participant in any effort to
support or oppose the practice of instructional coaching in the district. It was important for me to
be mindful of my own bias and for that reason, I reviewed other researchers’ instruments to aid
with credibility in the creation of my own.

46
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS
Chapter Four presents the findings of this study. As stated in Chapter One, the purpose of
this study is to evaluate the degree to which principals in Pearl City ISD are meeting their
performance goal of creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports
instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices. Instructional coaching is a
district sanctioned form of ongoing professional development for teachers. Principals are
primarily responsible for the implementation and evaluation of instructional coaching on a
school campus, and thus the primary stakeholder for this study. The analysis focuses on
knowledge and motivation of principals and organizational influences related to creating and
implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing
equitable instructional practices.
The questions guiding this study are the following:
1. What are the principals’ knowledge and motivation related to creating and implementing
a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable
instructional practices?
2. What is the interaction between Pearl City ISD’s culture and context and principals’
knowledge and motivation to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that
supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources related to creating and implementing a
comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable
instructional practices?

47
A qualitative study was designed to answer these questions. Interviews were conducted with
principals of Pearl City ISD.
Participating Stakeholders
All 11 principals in the Pearl City ISD received e-mails requesting their participation in
the interviews. Of these principals, eight work on elementary campuses and three are on middle
school campuses in the district. Three principals initially consented to participate in the study.
After a second round of e-mails, an additional four principals agreed to be interviewed. A total of
seven of the 11 principals in Pearl City ISD were interviewed for this study. Their experiences in
K-12 leadership range from 17 to 37 years. The results of these interviews are given and
analyzed in the following section. Table 5 is an overview of the participants in this study
including their years of experience and the type of school they oversee.
Table 5
Study Participants
Participant Years of Experience Type of School
P1 25+ Elementary
P2 30+ Middle
P3 20+ Middle
P4 20+ Elementary
P5 15+ Elementary
P6 10+ Elementary
P7 15+ Middle

48
Research Question One: Knowledge Findings
The knowledge findings for this study were derived from semi-structured interviews. The
two types of knowledge influences explored are conceptual and procedural. Themes have been
identified and organized for each type of knowledge influence. Interview questions were
designed to evaluate the factors that impact principals’ ability to facilitate effective and impactful
instructional coaching on their campuses. Because of the significance of each knowledge
influence, the criteria for classification as an asset was set at 86% of principals showing clear
knowledge. If fewer than six participants expressed clear knowledge of any particular influence,
it was considered a validated gap.
Conceptual Knowledge
The conceptual knowledge influences evaluated through this study include principals’
knowledge of effective instructional coaching strategies and their knowledge of effective
professional development for instructional coaches. There was no validated gap in the first
knowledge influence - knowledge of effective instructional coaching strategies. All seven
participants were asked questions regarding their understanding of effective practices for
instructional coaches during their interview (see Appendix A). Each participant showed a clear
understanding of the best practices for instructional coaching. Additionally, all participants
identified similar needs of the students on their campuses. However, there was a validated gap in
the second conceptual knowledge influence - knowledge of effective professional development
for instructional coaches. There were clearly identifiable disparities among participants’
knowledge of high-quality professional development for their instructional coaches. Based on
themes from their responses, this section examines findings related to principals’ knowledge of
student needs, coaching best practices, and coaching professional development.

49
An In-Depth Understanding of Students’ Needs
Responses to questions revealed that all principals recognize that students have social and
emotional needs that must be addressed on school campuses. Specifically, five of the participants
mentioned these needs as being significant. P3 stated, “within the last 10 years… there's been
several hurricanes that were near misses where we had to evacuate and then now with the
COVID 19, there's been a lot of trauma in their lives.” Furthermore, participants acknowledged
the need for teachers and the school to be able to address the social and emotional needs of their
students. P7 added, “they need support with simple kind of life skills, character which relates to
mutual respect, honor.” Table 6 includes comments from respondents that demonstrate this
knowledge.
Table 6

Participants Comments on Students’ Social Emotional Learning Needs
Participant Response
P2 “Time management, Family Support, social emotional learning...You've
got the SEL deprived child who is challenging.”
P3 “I think, is there, there's more of an awareness or more of an acceptance
of social emotional needs. I think it's always been a need, but I think that
there's just more emphasis placed upon it, you know, with the school
shootings and disasters and then just with kids in our area in particular
have been through.”
P4 “So, in general, I would say, social support. The poverty level here is
82% and so a lot of our kids struggle financially, they struggle with
having supervision in their house.”
P5 “And I would say really a lot of social emotional needs along with that.
They come with a lot of invisible baggage what they say. But yes, lots of
social emotional needs.”

50
P7 “We'll start with parental support, which is ah, can't do without that
number two would be social and emotional support. Students need health
and wellness support.”

In addition to students’ social and emotional needs, all seven respondents expressed
concern with students’ academic needs. The highlighted academic needs of students ranged from
classroom remediation to students being identified as needing Special Education Services. P6
spoke about having a large population of students identified as Special Education students. Other
principals spoke about academic struggles of their general education students. P4 stated,
“academically reading levels are a struggle for students and math as well.” P5 added to this
sentiment with, “definitely the academic needs. They're really behind and majority of them are at
least one or more than one year behind their grade level.” Table 7 includes comments from
respondents that demonstrate their identification of students’ academic needs.
Table 7
Participants Comments on Student Academic Needs
Participant Response
P1 “The kids that are struggling is because the content is not accessible for
them.”
P2 “And you've got the child over here who is challenged to learn.”
P3 “There's also obviously your academic needs and we're in a district
where a lot of kids do come into the school system behind in reading and
just trying to catch those kids up so that every kid gets a quality
education is a huge need.”
P4 “Academically there again, it ties back to, we have a very large special
ed population.”
P6 “So, I have a lot of sped [special education] students on my campus that
require not only a modified curriculum, accommodations, but the time it
takes to schedule.”

51
P7 “[Students need] academic support specifically to literacy.”

Clear Understanding of Effective Instructional Coaching Practices
All participants have had multiple years of experience with overseeing instructional
coaches. Researchers have identified several best practices for instructional coaching, including
building positive relationships, classroom observations, modeling lessons, and assisting teachers
with planning (Killion, et al., 2012; Knight 2007). All seven respondents were able to identify at
least two of these practices and confirmed that they are employed on a regular basis by
instructional coaches on their campuses. Table 8 includes responses to questions about effective
instructional coaching strategies.

52
Table 8

Participants Responses Regarding Effective Instructional Coaching Strategies
Participant Response
P1 (building positive
relationships)
“Encourage, encourage so that that person that goes back into
the classroom to teach is confident and they know where they're
going and what they want to hear and see and do. ”
P2 (building positive
relationships)
“A good relationship with the rank and file as well as the
campus leadership.”
P7 (building positive
relationships)
“Building relationships, we can start from there, you want to
build relationships of trust.”
P2 (classroom
observations)
“frequent observation, documentation, and conversation”
P4 (classroom
observations)
“...our own walk throughs. Okay. As we go through, we identify
areas that we may see that we could support the teacher with.”
P3 (modeling
lessons)
“that means modeling lesson for somebody, then let's do it”
P5 (modeling
lessons)
“And then we go modeling. First is the modeling and
observations...”
P7 (modeling
lessons)
“...show me what cold call teach back looks like, show me how
to build relationships with my students, show me how to engage
them in a collaborat[ion] be at a turn and talk...”
P6 (modeling
lessons)
“one teacher in their doing it, and the other teachers watching
her deliver to the students”
P1 (planning
instruction)
“coaching around planning. What does the teacher’s planning
piece look like?”
P5 (planning
instruction)
“Planning is a separate portion, what we need to improve on.”

53
While each participant was able to articulate at least one of the best practices discussed
by Killion et al. (2012), not all candidates listed all four practices in their responses. Table 9
details each participant and the strategies they offered as effective for instructional coaching.
Table 9
Effective Practices Identified by Participants
Participant Building
Positive
Relationships
Classroom
Observations
Modeling
Lessons
Planning
Instruction
P1 X X X
P2 X X
P3 X
P4 X
P5 X X
P6 X
P7 X X X X

Lack of Knowledge of Effective Professional Development
The intentional alignment of professional development to the vision and goals of a school
is important because it plays a significant role in how instructional coaches perform their duties
(Hopkins et al., 2017; Mangin & Dunsmore, 2014). Despite the need for this alignment, only
four participants were able to speak in detail about the types of professional development that are
most beneficial for instructional coaches. P1 spoke about the ongoing, job embedded
professional development for instructional coaches on the campus:
For the coaches it's basically on the spot, part of what we're doing is, let's say they're
going in to coach a teacher, I would come in alongside and watch the coaching. And then

54
we actually...have a clear map of what effective strategies are for coaches [and] we look
at it. Where's the gap, name it, practice it, so that they go back in and can make those
adjustments and their coaching.
Here P1 detailed how instructional coaches receive immediate feedback about their practices and
are then given the opportunity to make adjustments as needed.
Another participant, P3, spoke in detail about the use of a book study as a form of
ongoing professional development on their campus and said, “we went through the book
Leverage Leadership 2.0. So...instead of them getting this disjointed or disconnected PD
throughout the year...we have this book we're going through.” This principal included all
instructional leaders in the book study and used it to frame and focus the work of instructional
coaches for the year. Lastly, P7 spoke in detail about a learning series that included sessions
facilitated by outside experts from the area as a learning opportunity for instructional coaches
that campus.
The remaining four participants mentioned professional development being provided by
the Texas Center for Educator Excellence (TxCEE) grant, but they did not speak to any specifics
about these trainings or their impact on instructional coaches’ performance. There was a lack of
knowledge about key components necessary to train instructional coaches for their duties. This
indicates a gap in principals’ knowledge about effective professional development for
instructional coaches. A recommendation to address this conceptual knowledge gap is presented
in Chapter Five.
Procedural Knowledge
Participants were asked questions related to their procedural knowledge of the enactment
of instructional coaches. This knowledge included principals creating job descriptions and

55
schedules for instructional coaches. While this procedural knowledge is closely aligned with best
practices there can be differing methods with which instructional coaching is implemented
(Killion, 2012). While all participants listed several common roles and duties, only one was able
to speak to a schedule for their campus instructional coaches. Three participants also spoke in
detail about tasks performed by their instructional coaches that were not present on the other
campuses. Two additional influences emerged from the responses: 1) a lack of knowledge of
how competing priorities at the school and district level prevents some coaches from performing
their primary duties and 2) lack of understanding how to evaluate instructional coaches. Themes
related to procedural knowledge are categorized as knowledge of duties of instructional coaches,
competing priorities, and evaluating instructional coaches.
Need for the Creation of Job Descriptions and Schedules for Instructional Coaches
Duties assigned to instructional coaches by principals should be aligned with the purpose,
goal, and effective strategies related to the position of instructional coaches. The responses from
the participants varied from campus to campus. Four of the respondents indicated that their
instructional coaches engaged in discussion about data with teachers. Five participants stated that
their instructional coaches are responsible for completing classroom observations. Only three
participants discussed how instructional coaches assisted with teacher planning. Six of the
participants stated that instructional coaches facilitate campus learning communities (CLCs).
Only one respondent mentioned scheduling as a priority for instructional coaching. P7 indicated
that instructional coaches, “have biweekly calendars. So, [they must] plan ahead.” The lack of
knowledge of the process for scheduling instructional coaching duties is indicative of a gap in
procedural knowledge. A recommendation to resolve this issue is given in Chapter Five.

56
Need to Identify and Prioritize Duties of Instructional Coaches
Four of the participants identified tasks assigned to instructional coaches that were
outside the scope of the effective practices listed above in the conceptual knowledge findings.
These principals were aware that coaches were being pulled in many directions and recognized
this as part of the complexity of the role. Table 10 includes responses related to the competing
priorities of instructional coaches.
Table 10
Participant Responses Related to Competing Priorities of Instructional Coaches
Participant Response
P2 “Right now, it's a full time equivalent that's running scantrons.”
P3 “...some principals were using the [coaches] as assistant principals
and having them do bus duty and all kinds of crazy stuff and lunch
duty. And so suddenly there wasn’t enough time in their day to do
what they were hired to do.”
P4 “...they put them on a curriculum district curriculum team. They... put
them on DEC district meeting. So, they pull them in on district
meetings as well”
P6 “[Coaches] work with the AP on the small groups...they try to decide
how to best service, these kids for their tests...CBA or a state
assessment...whether it's an online version or a one to one, or it’s an
oral. And then, if need be...they're testing these kids…”
P7 “Because coaches have to be responsible when teachers don't come to
work. Coaches have to be responsible when the lesson plans aren't
turned in on time. If lesson plans aren't adjusted on time, if exit ticket
data has not been inputted...they also prepare assessments, so they are
responsible for writing the assessments [and] putting them together.”

The extra duties enumerated by principals are not best practices for instructional coaching. These
responses were further indication of the procedural knowledge gap that exists for principals in
creating schedules and definitive job descriptions for instructional coaches.

57
Lack of Tool for Evaluating Instructional Coaches
All seven participants were asked questions regarding the evaluation of instructional
coaches (See Appendix A). Five of the participants indicated that instructional coaches were
evaluated based on TxCEE grant requirements. This process seems to be nebulous because only
two respondents were able to speak to this system with any specificity. P2 shared, “I observed
the CLL meetings and the collaborative learning community meetings. I observed them and I use
a document in the team's web base to complete a rubric on the [coach’s] performance.”
Additionally, P3 added. “They have to continue to be certified as an effective teacher so through
their T-TESS observations and through their SLO or Student Learning Objectives.” Two
respondents offered observations as a part of their evaluation of instructional coaches, two
respondents suggested student work was used as an evaluative tool, and one respondent stated
that improved instruction was a metric for effective instructional coaching. Two of the
respondents did not list a method for which instructional coaches are evaluated. This procedural
knowledge was a validated gap. A recommendation for its remedy is provided in Chapter Five.
Based on a review of relevant literature, three knowledge influences were initially
identified for principals as critical in the context of facilitating effective instructional coaching .
After an analysis of data following data collection, four influences emerged as relevant to the
work of principals in implementing effective instructional programs. Principals showed
knowledge of effective practices employed by instructional coaches and thus this gap does not
exist in the district. The remaining three influences were verified as gaps in knowledge among
principals within Pearl City ISD (see Figure 3 in the Summary section of this chapter). A
program that targets these specific gaps is outlined in Chapter Five.

58
Research Question One: Motivation Findings
The motivation findings for this study were derived from semi-structured interviews. The
two types of motivational influences evaluated in this study were utility value and attributions.
Themes have been identified and organized for each type of motivation influence. Interview
questions were designed to evaluate the degree to which these influences impact principals’
ability to facilitate effective and impactful instructional coaching on their campuses. Clark and
Estes (2008) argued that motivation was the most important of all influences. For this reason, the
criteria for classification as an asset was set at 100% of participants. If any principal lacked clear
and convincing motivation in either influence, it was considered a validated gap.
Utility Value
All seven participants were asked questions regarding their value for instructional
coaching (see Appendix A) during their interview. Each participant showed value for the
capacity of instructional coaches’ ability to make teachers feel supported. Additionally, most
participants expressed value for instructional coaching as a method for improving student
outcomes. However, there was no mention of the use of instructional coaching as a method of
promoting equity in education. Promoting equitable instructional practices is the primary
performance goal for principals. As such, there is a significant gap in this motivational influence.
Responses were categorized along three themes related to this value influence: equitable
instructional practices (gap), teachers feel supported (not a gap), and student learning (not a gap).
No Value for Instructional Coaching in Producing Equitable Instructional Practices
Participant responses to questions regarding their value of instructional coaching varied.
Notably missing from the discussion was the use of instructional coaching to increase the use of
equitable instructional practices of teachers. None of the principals identified instructional

59
coaching as having value in relation to increasing the use of equitable instructional practices.
This omission reveals a substantial gap in motivation. Hammond (2015) revealed that
instructional coaching is effective for increasing teachers’ use of culturally responsive
instruction. Principals need to value this in order to effectively improve outcomes for all
students. A recommendation for this motivational gap is offered in Chapter Five.
Instructional Coaching Improved Teachers’ Feeling Supported
When answering questions regarding their value for instructional coaching, six of the
seven participants expressed value in instructional coaching for its ability to make teachers feel
supported. Providing support for teachers is necessary but not sufficient in promoting their use of
equitable instructional practices. The support of teachers noted my principals was evident in two
notable ways; providing continuous learning and completing tasks that would otherwise be
assigned to teachers. Table 11 includes responses related to teachers feeling supported by
instructional coaches.
Table 11
Participants Responses Regarding Teachers Feeling Supported
Participant Response
P1 “And I've had teachers that have come back or have said, oh my
gosh. Now, now I get it. Now, I understand. And I feel like they've
felt supported. We’ve been kind of hard on them with the
expectation, but I feel like in the end they have felt supported.”

P3 “They save time for teachers and help teachers focus their efforts.
So, for example, our instructional coaches pull a lot of the data for
teachers before the PLC meetings so that when we get into the PLC
meetings, we're actually talking about actionable steps and we're not
wasting time…”

60
P4 “And to support that teacher without making the teacher feel and
competent. That's our number one goal...so they have to know that
they're being supported.”
P5 “At least I know the consistency level is there...and everything is
strong... because of their support [for teachers].”
P6 “And then just supporting the teachers, getting them ready…”
P7 “So, the needs of the teachers are definitely paid attention to and we
provide them more support based on their need.”

It is obvious that principals value instructional coaching as method for making teachers feel
supported. While this is an important aspect of instructional coaching, support for teachers alone
does not result in equitable instruction. Moreover, principals spoke of this support in very
general terms and did not specifically mention how or whether instructional coaching supported
teachers in the use of equitable practices.
Student Learning Improves
Four of the seven respondents expressed value for instructional coaching based on its
ability to improve student outcomes. These improvements were specific to academic progress
based on data from standardized tests. Table 12 includes responses related to improved student
performance.
Table 12
Participants Responses on Instructional Coaching Improving Student Achievement
Participant Response
P1 “[Without instructional coaches] we would continue to lose
kids and not be able to fill in their gaps.”
P4 “They are critical part of growing a campus academically.”
P5 “That's really needed to improve a few skills...we choose the
max two skills or two skills minimum they need”

61
P6 “So, we rely a lot on [instructional coaches] to help us
strengthen our students’ gaps.”

Attribution
This section of questions was related to principals attributing the successful
implementation of instructional coaching to their own leadership efforts rather than external
factors such as instructional coaches’ skill set and organizational support. The responses to these
questions differed significantly. All principals identified multiple external factors as impacting
the implementation of instructional coaching on their campuses. Only two principals identified
ways in which their leadership practices impacted instructional coaching on their campus. The
lack of perceived control by principals is a significant motivational gap. The themes that
emerged from the responses were categorized as follows: clearly communicated vision, support
and collaboration, fidelity of implementation.
Need for Clearly Communicated Campus Vision
Out of the seven participants, only two principals identified their responsibility of clearly
articulating a vision for the campus as an attribution of the successful implementation of
instructional coaching. P1 stated,
If you don't have a vision for what that instruction is supposed to look like, then what are
you coaching? It's...if the teacher has a vision of what it looks like [and] a principal may
have a vision, but if it's not a shared vision, if it's not something in writing, if it is not
explicit as far as expectations, then what's the coaching for?
In this statement, P1 has articulated that it is the principal’s responsibility to set the vision for the
campus and the focus for instruction. P2 offered, “We have not built those blueprints and that is
going to be what we work on henceforth.” This statement was an acknowledgement that vision

62
for instructional coaches on the campus must come from and be communicated by campus
leaders. However, only one principal described creating and articulating that vision on their
campus.
Principals Provide Support and Collaboration
Five of the participants discussed their collaboration with instructional coaches in CLCs
and other leadership meetings. Principals appear to view their participation in these meetings as a
way to contribute to the success of instructional coaching on their campuses. Table 13 includes
responses related to principals' collaboration with instructional coaches.
Table 13
Participants Response Related to Collaboration with Instructional Coaches
Participant Response
P1 “I'm thinking of a principal [as] coaching a[n instructional] coach.”
P2 “[The instructional coach] no longer chairs the campus CLC, I do.
And I'm shifting us from the business meeting format to a staff
development format”
P3 “The [instructional coach] and I sort of chose the primary focus for
the CLC.”
P4 “We meet weekly [to identify areas of struggle then] bring [teachers]
in, talk to them and see what their thoughts are.”
P5 “I made a consistent effort to go [to CLC meetings] at least every
other week.”

Lack of Fidelity of Implementation
One respondent identified fidelity of implementation as the responsibility of the principal
as well as an attribution of a success instructional coaching program. P2 stated, “My
accountability is to bring fidelity to that system.” Fidelity in any program is important for

63
success. The lack of principals attributing their leadership to the successful implementation of
instructional coaching is a validated gap. Recommendations to address this lack of motivation
are presented in Chapter Five.
Based on a review of relevant literature, two motivational influences were initially
identified for principals. After an analysis of data following data collection, those two influences
were verified as gaps in knowledge among principals within Pearl City ISD (see Figure 3 in they
Summary section of this chapter). A program that targets these specific motivation gaps is
outlined in Chapter Five.
Research Question Two: Organizational Findings
The organizational findings for this study were derived from semi-structured interviews.
The gaps identified in the conceptual framework of this study are from both organizational
models and settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Based on the research that supported the
design of this study, the assumed organizational influences were the following: organizational
value of instructional coaching (cultural model), policies to support instructional coaching
(cultural setting), promotion of accountability (cultural setting), and tools for evaluating the
effectiveness of instructional coaching (cultural setting). Themes have been identified and
organized for each type of organizational influence. Interview questions (see Appendix A) were
designed to evaluate the degree to which these influences impact principals’ ability to facilitate
effective and impactful instructional coaching on their campuses. Additionally, district
leadership meeting agendas were analyzed to assess organizational gaps (see Appendix B).
Because of the significance of each knowledge influence, the criteria for classification as an asset
was set at 86% of principals. If fewer than six participants expressed clear knowledge of any
particular influence, it was considered a validated gap.

64
Low Value for Instructional Coaching Within the District
Principals answered questions regarding their perceptions of the district’s value for
instructional coaching. Most participants agreed to varying degrees that the district’s value for
instructional coaching was evident solely on their procurement of grants funding the effort.
Based on the analysis of interviewee responses and district leadership meeting agendas, it is clear
that a gap exists in the district’s value of instructional coaching. Several participants expressed
frustration with the lack of support from the district in providing clear expectations and
professional development for instructional coaches. These themes were categorized as financial
contribution through grant compliance and lack of support.
Financial Contribution
Six of seven participants identified the district’s procurement of grant funding as an
indication of its support for instructional coaching. Table 14 includes responses regarding the
allocation of grant funds for instructional coaching.
Table 14
Participants Responses Related to Pearl City ISD’s Funding of Instructional Coaches
Participants Response
P1 “and that was quite...significant for them to spend that kind of
money.”
P2 “Well, it's paying salaries and it all goes back to the
pocketbook.”
P3 “So, it was the district that ran out and won the grant to get to
fund these positions.”
P4 “I do think that district values that they keep going after the
grants and the grants support [instructional coaches].”
P6 “They've worked on grants to be able to fund these positions I
believe they understand the importance and know that.”

65
P7 “When I asked for money, or if I asked for support in those
ways that that it would be considered. I had some grant
opportunities.”

One participant added that during the during COVID-19 pandemic beginning in early
2020, when students were at home participating in school virtually, the district required
campuses to complete compliance processes of the TxCEE grant. P2 offered:
So, it's valued enough where even in a pandemic we were pressed to complete the
process. Our instructional coaching process is driven by the Student Learning Objectives
(SLO) process, which is driven by TxCEE. So does the district value TxCEE? Yeah,
we're doing SLOs in a pandemic. How's that for value?
This participant viewed Pearl City ISD’s commitment to compliance with the TxCEE grant as
evidence of its value for the instructional coaching program.
Document analysis of leadership meeting agendas confirmed the districts’ commitment to
compliance with the TxCEE grant. SLO updates were included in three of the 12 meetings with
district administrators and campus principals. However, there was no direct mention of
instructional coaching specifically.
Lack of Organizational Support for Instructional Coaching
Other than financial support from the grant, participants did not offer concrete ways in
which the district showed value for the practice of instructional coaching. Participants noted
several ways in which the district communicated at worst its lack of value and at best its lack of
understanding for policies and procedures that support instructional coaching programs
according to the interviewee responses. Five of seven principals identified several ways in

66
which the district lacks support for the instructional coaching program. Table 15 includes
participants’ responses regarding Pearl City ISD’s lack of support for instructional coaching.
Table 15

Participants Responses Regarding Pearl City ISD’s Lack of Support for Instructional Coaching
Participant Response
P1 I just think there's a lack of understanding or a lack of clear
expectations are exemplars of what a coach should look like. What
does coaching look like in Pearl City ISD...a portrait of a coach? I
feel like that is something we could use.
P3 “So, I feel like that the district doesn't provide support because it
was all written into the grant. And so, the grant does provide those
things, but it doesn't come from the district, per se.”
P5 “We don't have a division of instructional coaches at the district
level...I feel like the district has a lots of people who can come and
tell you what's wrong, and right at your campus, but they do not
provide the support that's needed to fix the problem. We have
created our own procedures. There are no district level supports
[that] exists.”
P6 “So, I always feel like that this position is not as understood as it
should be from [district] administration.”
P7 “My short answer would be no. Just when it comes to actually
physically people coming in the building to do some of those
things... that we have not had experience with from the district
level.”

These responses regarding a lack of value for instructional coaching in the district were
validated by analysis of leadership meeting agendas. In the 12 agendas that were analyzed for
this study, instructional coaching was not a topic for discussion. The lack of value for
instructional coaching as indicated by supportive policies and procedures and leadership
(district) attention is an organizational gap. Recommendations to address this concern are given
in Chapter Five.

67
Mixed Perception of Organizational Accountability for Instructional Coaching
There are significant gaps in accountability for implementation of instructional coaching
in Pearl City ISD. All seven participants were asked questions about their performance
evaluations during their interview. Five participants discussed the use of a tool called Texas
Principal Evaluation and Support System (T-PESS) to evaluate their performance. T-PESS is a
rubric created by Texas Education Agency (TEA) to evaluate principal performance guided by
evidence-based standards from four categories: continuous growth and improvement, guided
self-reflection, inform professional development, and improve leadership qualities (TEA, 2020).
However, this tool does not directly evaluate how principals oversee the implementation of
instructional coaching.
Participant responses regarding accountability for principals varied greatly. Some
participants stated they were not held accountable and others discussed rubrics that were used as
evaluative tools. The themes that emerged from the responses were conversations with district
administrators, rubrics, and student data on state standardized assessments. The wide range of
responses to questions regarding accountability of principals are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Participants Responses to Accountability for Principals

68
Based on document analysis of district leadership meeting agendas, there was no
discussion of accountability of the instructional coaching programs. The only mention of
accountability was related to teacher evaluation through T-TESS. The lack of consistency with
evaluating principals’ accountability with regards to overseeing instructional coaching is a
validated organization gap. A recommendation to address this influence is presented in Chapter
Five.
Based on a review of relevant literature, two organizational influences of value and
accountability for instructional coaching emerged as significant for principals to meet their
performance goal. After an analysis of data following data collection, each of these influences
were verified as gaps in Pearl City ISD (see Figure 3 in they Summary section of this chapter). A
program that targets these specific gaps is outlined in Chapter Five.
Summary
Using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework as the conceptual framework
this qualitative study attempted to identify how knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences impact stakeholder and organizational goal attainment. Principals were the primary
stakeholder group for this study with their goal as creating and implementing a comprehensive
program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices.
Questions surrounding knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence of principals drove
the design of this study. Principals’ achievement of their specific goal promotes the attainment of
the organizational goal to provide relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing professional
learning opportunities for teachers. Findings from the data were presented and are further
summarized here. Figure 3 represents the validated knowledge, motivational, and organizational
gaps based on the data analysis.

69
Knowledge Influences
The data revealed that while principals have a fundamental knowledge of the most
effective practices for instructional coaching, there are other significant gaps in their
understanding of creating and implementing a comprehensive program. Principals’ knowledge
gaps include professional development for coaches, best practices for designing schedules and
duties, and effective methods for evaluating instructional coaches. An additional knowledge gap
that was identified through data analysis was the knowledge of how to identify and mitigate
competing priorities for instructional coaches. Recommendations to address knowledge
influences are presented in Chapter Five.
Motivational Influences
Two motivational gaps were identified for the principals in this study. The findings
revealed that while principals recognize various positive outcomes from instructional coaching,
they lack a value for instructional coaching as a means to promote equitable instructional
practices. Additionally, principals did not attribute the success or failure of instructional
coaching to their leadership efforts. Recommendations to address motivational influences are
presented in Chapter Five.
Organizational Influences
Findings indicate that Pearl City ISD shows little value for the practice of instructional
coaching outside of funding the positions through the procurement of grants. The organization
does not have policies or procedures to support instructional coaches, does not offer tools to
evaluate instructional coaches, inconsistently evaluates principals’ oversight of instructional
coaches. Recommendations to address organizational influences are presented in Chapter Five.

70
Figure 3
Validated Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Gaps

71
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
This dissertation focused on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
that impacted principal’s ability to create and implement comprehensive instructional coaching
programs that promote the use of equitable instructional practices. The principals’ performance
goal was born from the district’s goals to “implement viable and innovative curriculum and
effective instructional programs that address the needs of all learners” (Pearl City ISD website,
2019). One performance goal for Pearl City ISD in its effort to achieve its mission of “Educate,
Engage, and Empower Each student for a life of Excellence” is to provide professional learning
opportunities to teachers that are relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing by the end of the
2019-20 school year (District Innovation Plan, 2017). This goal led to the creation of
instructional coaching positions on each campus.
Principals were selected as the primary stakeholders for this study because they have the
most control over the constraints in which instructional coaching and professional learning is
enacted. Principals are in charge of creating clear roles and responsibilities for coaches,
providing them with relevant professional development and protecting their time to practice
instructional coaching on the school campus. Two questions were used to guide this study: 1)
What are the principals’ knowledge and motivation related to creating and implementing a
comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional
practices? and 2) What are the principals’ knowledge and motivation related to creating and
implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional coaches in establishing
equitable instructional practices?

72
Chapter Four presented the findings for each knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influence. The data analysis revealed gaps in several areas. Chapter Five offers content-specific
recommendations for each of these gaps. From those recommendations a specific training and
development program has been created and detailed in the sections that follow. Once
implemented, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Model will be used to measure
and evaluate the effectiveness of the program from the model’s four frames: reaction, learning,
behavior and results.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Analysis of data obtained during this study revealed that gaps in knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences impacting principals’ goal achievement. The following section
focuses on the third research question for this study 3) What are the recommendations for
organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources
related to creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports instructional
coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices? The next sections outline
recommendations for each knowledge, motivation, and organizational gap.
Knowledge Recommendations
Based on the literature reviewed, three knowledge influences emerged that impact
principals’ ability to facilitate effective instructional coaching. Two of the influences are
conceptual and one influence is procedural knowledge. Principals defining roles, duties, and
schedules of instructional coaching is a validated gap of high priority. An additional validated
gap is principals’ ability to identify effective professional development for instructional coaches.
Based on interviews with principals it was evident that principals in Pearl City ISD lack these

73
important and fundamental tools to support instructional coaching. Table 16 indicates where
knowledge gaps exist for Pearl City ISD principals, as well as principles that guide
recommendations to the organization to alleviate these gaps.
Table 16
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge Influence

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals need to define the
roles, duties, and schedules of
instructional coaches. (P)

Learning information in a way
that is meaningful and
connects prior knowledge is
stored more quickly and
remembered more accurately
because it is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

*Information Processing
System Theory

Provide a space, time,
and structured job
aids for principals to
collaboratively create
a job description, list
of duties, and
schedules for
instructional coaches.

Then provide
principals with an
opportunity to reflect
on how closely the
instructional coaches’
daily activities are
aligned to the created
schedule.
Principals need to know
effective professional
development for instructional
coaches. (C)
Learning tasks that are similar
to those that are common to
the individual’s familiar
cultural settings will promote
learning and transfer
(Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001)
*Sociocultural Theory
Provide principals
with information on
professional
development that
supports the needs of
instructional coaches
in general.

Then allow principals
to determine which
learning opportunities
would best serve their
specific instructional
coaches based on
their respective
contexts.

74
Defining Roles and Responsibilities for Instructional Coaches
The results and findings of this study indicated that 86% of principals need clearly
defined roles and responsibility for their campus instructional coaches. A recommendation based
in information processing theory has been selected to close this procedural knowledge gap. Shaw
and McCrudden (2006) indicated that connecting new learning with prior understanding allows
individuals to store knowledge more quickly and accurately. Consequently, providing learners an
opportunity to collaborate based on current job descriptors would support their learning. The
recommendation is for principals to work in concert to build job descriptions, responsibilities,
and schedules for their instructional coaches. This form would be similar to current job
descriptions for other campus positions and include practices and tasks specific to instructional
coaches.
Walkowiak (2016) indicated that defining roles and duties of instructional coaches should
be a collaborative effort. Principals can connect their knowledge of effective instructional
coaching practices with the new task of creating job descriptions specifically for that position.
Mayer and Moreno (2003) described how the use of multi-media tools, such as job aids, with
words and pictures decreases cognitive load and thus improves meaningful learning. The
evidence affirms providing a space, time, and structured job aids for principals to collaboratively
create a job description, list of duties, and schedules for instructional coaches.
Determining Effective Training and Professional Development for Instructional Coaches
The results and findings of this study indicate that 43% of principals lack knowledge of
effective professional development for instructional coaches. A recommendation based on
sociocultural theory has been selected to close this declarative knowledge gap. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) found that learning tasks that are similar to those that are common to the

75
individual’s familiar cultural settings promote learning and transfer. This suggests that giving
learners opportunities to complete tasks similar to ones they already perform would be beneficial
to their learning. The recommendation is to provide principals with information on professional
development that supports the needs of instructional coaches in general, then allowing principals
to determine which learning opportunities would best serve their specific instructional coaches
based on their respective contexts.
Hallinger (2005) described principals as instructional leaders responsible for aligning
strategies and activities to improve student learning. Boston et al. (2017) demonstrated that with
a short amount of professional development principals were able to better determine high quality
instructional practices. The tasks of identifying quality instructional practices for students and
effective professional development for instructional coaches are similar in nature. Based on the
parallel, principals are in the best position to determine which professional development
opportunities are closest aligned to the needs of the school and initiatives of the district
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2005). The evidence, thus, affirms providing information about
professional development to principals and allowing them to determine which learning
opportunities would best serve their specific instructional coaches based on their respective
contexts.
Motivation Recommendations
Two motivational influences were deemed significant based on the literature review.
These influences are based on theories of attribution and value. Principals must see the value of
instructional coaching in improving equitable instructional practices among teachers is both a
validated and prioritized motivational influence. Principals attributing the success of
instructional coaching as a product of their leadership is the second validated and prioritized

76
motivational influence. Based on the data analysis, evidence suggests that principals in Pearl
City ISD are lacking these two vital factors necessary to support effective instructional coaching.
Table 17 indicates where motivation gaps exist for Pearl City ISD principals, as well as
principles that guide recommendations to the organization to alleviate these gaps.
Table 17
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation Influence*

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals need to see the value of
instructional coaching in
improving equitable pedagogical
practices among teachers. (Value)
Rationales that include a
discussion of the importance
and utility value of the work
or learning can help learners
develop positive values
(Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).

Principals will
participate in a guided
discussion regarding the
ways in which
instructional coaching
can improve equitable
pedagogical practices.

Principals attribute effective
implementation of instructional
coaching to their own
organizational and leadership
efforts. (Attribution)
Attribute success or failures to
effort (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009).
Provide accurate feedback
that identifies the skills or
knowledge the individual
lacks, along with
communication that skills and
knowledge can be learned,
followed with the teaching of
these skills and knowledge
(Anderman & Anderman,
2009).

District administrators
will observe principals’
interaction with
instructional coaches
and provide feedback.

A section based solely
on the implementation
of instructional
coaching will be added
to principals’
evaluation.

District will highlight
principals who are
making improvements
with instructional
coaching on their
campuses.

77
Creating the Value of Instructional Coaching
None of principals indicated they saw value in instructional coaching as a tool to improve
equitable instructional practices for teachers. A recommendation based on utility value theory
has been selected to close this gap. Research has shown that rationales that include a discussion
of the importance and utility value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive
values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). This suggests that providing principals with opportunities
to discuss the benefits of instructional coaching would increase their value of the work. The
recommendation for this organization is to have principals participate in a guided discussion
regarding the ways in which instructional coaching can improve equitable instructional practices.
This type of framed and targeted discussion increases value.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that utility value helps justify one’s persistence in a
task. Hulleman et al. (2010) found that a simple intervention such as writing about the relevance
of an instructional task increased the participants’ perceived value of that task. The researchers
added that this intervention maintained the participants’ interests beyond the experiment,
indicating they were likely to continue using that instructional task in the future. Lazowski and
Hulleman (2015) found that six similar educational interventions also showed success in
improving perceived value of tasks. Based on these findings, it is evident that having principals
participate in a guided discussion regarding the ways in which instructional coaching can
improve equitable pedagogical practices will increase their value of the practice.
Attribute Effective Instructional Coaching to Their own Leadership Efforts
According to the results of this study, approximately 71% of principals attribute effective
implementation of instructional coaching to factors other than their organizational and leadership
efforts. A recommendation based on attribution theory has been chosen to close this gap.

78
Anderman and Anderman (2009) suggested that providing accurate feedback that identifies the
skills or knowledge the individual lacks, along with communication that skills and knowledge
can be learned, followed with the teaching of these skills and knowledge increases motivation.
This suggests that providing principals with actionable feedback about their practice will
increase their attribution of success to their efforts. The recommendation for this organization is
for district administrators to observe principals' interaction with instructional coaches and
provide written and actionable feedback by including a section based solely on the
implementation of instructional coaching in principals’ evaluation. Additionally, the district will
highlight principals who are making improvements with instructional coaching on their
campuses.
Providing feedback that focuses on process and stresses the importance of effort is the
key to addressing attribution motivational gaps (Rueda, 2011; Pintrich, 2003). Hattie and
Timperly (2007) posited that the use of feedback can help close the gaps between current and
desired performance outcomes. Gan et al. (2018) found that activity-based feedback correlated
with positive motivational factors. Additionally, Wergin (2001) asserted that simple recognition
of one’s work and effort can lead to increased motivation to complete a job. The
recommendation is for district administrators to observe principals' interaction with instructional
coaches and provide feedback, add a section based solely on the implementation of instructional
coaching to principals’ evaluation, and highlight principals who are making improvements with
instructional coaching on their campuses in a district newsletter or district website. The evidence
suggests that the provided recommendation will increase principals’ motivation to successfully
implement instructional coaching on their campuses.

79
Organization Recommendations

Based on the literature reviewed, four organization influences emerged that impact
principals’ ability to facilitate effective instructional coaching. Two of the influences are cultural
models and two are cultural settings (Clark & Estes, 2008). In order for principals to successfully
create and implement an instructional coaching program that promotes equitable outcomes the
school district must promote the value of instructional coaching and accountability for campus
leaders. This value should be shown through the creation of policies and procedures that support
instructional coaching as well as tools to measure its effective implementation. Interview
responses confirmed that organizational gaps exist for all four influences. Table 18 indicates
where organizational gaps exist for Pearl City ISD principals, as well as principles that guide
recommendations specific to the district.

80
Table 18
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Organization Influence*

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Pearl City ISD should promote a
culture of accountability for
principals on the effective
implementation of instructional
coaching to support equitable
instructional practices.
(model)

Measurement of learning and
performance are essential
components of an effective
accountability system capable
of improving organizational
performance.
(Marsh & Farrell, 2015;
Dowd & Shieh, 2013;
Golden, 2006)

Understanding the meaning
of equity, diversity and
access in your organizational
context enhances the capacity
to improve organizational
climate and outcomes. (Lim,
Haddad & Daugherty, 2013;
Trenerry & Paradies, 2012;
Darling- Hammond, 2007)
*accountability & diversity

District administrators
and principals will
disaggregate data by
race, ethnicity, gender
and other subgroups
and use the findings to
collaboratively identify
indicators that show
principals’ progress
towards creating and
implementing a
comprehensive
program that supports
instructional coaches
in establishing
equitable instructional
practices.
These indicators will
be used as a scorecard
to evaluate principals’
progress towards the
goal.

Pearl City ISD should promote the
value of instructional coaching as a
means of improving teacher use of
equitable instructional practices.
(model)
Organizational effectiveness
increases when leaders
identify, articulate, focus the
organization’s effort on and
reinforce the organization’s
vision; they lead from the
why.
(Rath & Conchie, 2009;
Schein, 2004; Waters,
Marzano & McNulty, 2003;
District level
administrators will
communicate the
organizational vision at
every principal
meeting.
District administrators
will establish concrete
goals for instructional
coaching aligned with

81
Wigfield & Eccles 2000;
Knowles, 1980)

*leadership

the mission and
priorities of the
district.

Pearl City ISD should have policies
that support effective instructional
coaching.
(setting)

Effective organizations
ensure that organizational
messages, rewards, policies
and procedures that govern
the work of the organization
are aligned with or are
supportive of organizational
goals and values (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
*Organizational change
District administrators
will review, revise, and
create policies,
procedures. Messages
related to instructional
coaching will be
checked for alignment
or interference with
district goals.

Pearl City ISD should have a tool to
evaluate the effectiveness of
instructional coaching.
(setting)

Accountability is increased
when organizations adopt a
balanced scorecard approach
to assessing performance.
(Bensimon, 2007)
*Accountability
District level
administrators in
collaboration with
campus principals and
instructional coaches
will develop goals and
indicators to reflect
various measures of
performance for
instructional coaches.
These indicators will
be used as a part of
The Equity Scorecard
to be utilized by
campus principals to
evaluate instructional
coaches.

82
Promoting a Culture of Accountability for Principals
The results section of this study showed that Pearl City ISD does not have a system for
which it holds campus principals accountable for instructional coaching as a means to promote
equitable instruction in schools. A recommendation rooted in accountability and diversity
theories was selected to address this organizational gap. Understanding the meaning of equity,
diversity and access in your organizational context enhances the capacity to improve
organizational climate and outcomes (Lim et al., 2013; Trenerry & Paradies, 2012; Darling-
Hammond, 2007). Additionally, measurement of learning and performance are essential
components of an effective accountability system capable of improving organizational
performance (Marsh & Farrell, 2015; Dowd & Shieh, 2013; Golden, 2006). This suggests that
principals and district administrators should work in concert to create a method for evaluating
performance towards the goal of equity for students. The recommendation is for district
administrators and principals to disaggregate data by race, ethnicity, gender, and other
subgroups; they should use the findings to collaboratively identify indicators that show
principals’ progress towards creating and implementing a comprehensive program that supports
instructional coaches in establishing equitable instructional practices. This recommendation also
includes using these indicators to create a scorecard to evaluate principals’ progress towards the
goal. For example, during a principals’ meeting district and campus administrators can create a
list of goals based on student data from the previous year’s assessment.
Harris and Bensimon (2007) found that The Equity Scorecard, which a collaborative
collection of and institution’s disaggregated data based on race and ethnicity, is an effective tool
to assess and respond to disparities in student outcomes within an organization. Furthermore, the
process of creating a scorecard incorporates identifying indicators towards progressively

83
addressing and remedying concerns as they are found (Harris & Bensimon, 2007). Koyama
(2014) found that principals use accountability instruments as tools to “create their own collages
of sensemaking to inform their actions” (p. 300). The evidence suggests that the provided
recommendation will improve Pearl City’s promotion of accountability for principals.
Promoting the Value of Instructional Coaching
The results indicated that outside of financial support, Pearl City ISD does not promote
value for instructional coaching. A recommendation based on leadership theory was selected to
address this organizational gap. Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders identify,
articulate, focus the organization’s effort on and reinforce the organization’s vision; they lead
from the why (Rath & Conchie, 2009; Schein, 2004; Waters et al., 2003; Wigfield & Eccles
2000; Knowles, 1980). This suggests that continuously communicating about the visions will
promote the district’s value for instructional coaching. The recommendation is for the district
level administrators to communicate the organizational vision at every principal meeting as well
as establishing concrete goals for instructional coaching aligned with the mission and priorities
of the district. For example, the district can have the review of the scorecard as a standing item
on the agenda for weekly principals’ meetings.
Psencik et al. (2019)’s study of a school district’s instructional coaching initiative was
positively impacted due to the intentional work of its leaders in establishing goals and clearly
communicating expectations. Teachers reported instructional coaching as having a positive
impact on their instruction, and outside evaluators found that the district was on track to building
their desired system capacity (Psencik, 2019). Additionally, Abrego and Pankake (2011) found
that a school district’s use of a scorecard and a decision-making matrix enhanced its
organizational change towards professional learning. The evidence indicates that the identified

84
recommendation will improve the organizational context for instructional coaching in Pearl City
ISD.
Creating Policies and Procedures that Support Instructional Coaching
The results showed that there are no significant district policies in place that support
instructional coaching. A recommendation rooted in organizational change theory was selected
to address this organizational gap. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that effective organizations
ensure that organizational messages, rewards, policies and procedures that govern the work of
the organization are aligned with or are supportive of organizational goals and values. This
suggests that aligning policy with the goals of the district would be beneficial to the work of
instructional coaches. The recommendation is that district administrators will review, revise, and
create additional policies and procedures directly related to instructional coaching. Messages
related to instructional coaching will be checked for alignment or interference with district goals.
Clark and Estes (2008) posited that a significant component for supporting organizations
to effectively implement change includes incorporating processes with proven success, clear
vision and performance goals, measuring progress towards those goals, and constant
communication with about the progress. King and Bouchard (2011) found that policies that are
clear but flexible enough for the needs of individual campuses are necessary for building
organizational capacity. The evidence suggests that the provided recommendation will improve
Pearl City’s promotion of support instructional coaching in the district.
Creating a Tool to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Instructional Coaching
Chapter Four of this study showed that Pearl City ISD does not have a tool in place to
evaluate instructional coaches. A recommendation based on accountability theory was selected to
address this organizational gap. Bensimon (2007) asserted that accountability is increased when

85
organizations adopt a balanced scorecard approach to assessing performance. This suggests that
using a scorecard, similar to the one previously suggested for principals, would be an effective
tool for evaluating instructional coaches’ performance. The recommendation is that district level
administrators in collaboration with campus principals and instructional coaches will develop
goals and indicators to reflect various measures of performance for instructional coaches. These
indicators will be used as a scorecard to be utilized by campus principals to evaluate instructional
coaches.
As stated before, The Equity Scorecard helps identity and address disparities in student
achievement within an organization (Harris & Bensimon, 2007). The process of creating an
Equity Scorecard identifies performance targets that can be used as an evaluative tool for
instructional coaches. Aligning expectations, support, and accountability enables the successful
implementation of educational initiatives (Cobb et al., 2013; Curtis, 2001). This evidence
suggests that the providing recommendation will be effective for evaluating instructional coaches
in Pearl City ISD.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) model for training evaluation was used to design the
implementation and evaluation planned that is outlined in this section. The New World
Kirkpatrick Model is a comprehensive guide for creating and evaluating training programs across
all professions. The model includes four levels: Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) asserted that a disproportionate amount of attention is given
to level one and two of the model even though these alone cannot achieve the desired changes in
an organization. The authors suggested that the levels be considered in reverse.

86
Level four in the New World Kirkpatrick Model refers to the desired outcomes from
participants based on their attendance at the training. Level four is measured by leading
indicators that are tracked to determine the positive impact on the organization. Level three in the
model refers to the application of new learning acquired at the training. This includes critical
behaviors that are necessary to achieve the targeted goal and required drivers that support those
behaviors. Level two refers to the acquired knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and
commitment of employees as a result of their participation in the training. Each of these
components must be aligned with the goal of the organization to have the desired impact. Level
one refers to participants’ reaction to the training including their satisfaction, engagement, and
perceived relevance of training to their work.
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
Several recommendations have been suggested to close knowledge, motivation, and
organizational gaps. The expected results from these recommendations are that coaches receive
the necessary tools and support to effectively implement their role, teachers are supported and
equipped to improve their instruction, and students are engaged in lessons that are both equitable
and academically challenging. Improved and equitable student outcomes is the ultimate goal for
all stakeholders.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
There are several short-term measurements that would indicate principals are achieving
their desired outcomes. Improved instructional coaching practices as evidenced by teacher
surveys and principal observations should result from the recommended interventions. Teachers’
increased use of equitable instruction is also an indicator of goal attainment. Racial minority
students expressing an improved sense of belonging and success would suggest that equitable,

87
culturally appropriate, and inclusive practices are being employed by teachers. Additionally,
improved nine weeks grades and STAAR test results would indicate that classroom instruction is
equity based and meeting the educational needs of all students. Table 19 includes the expected
outcomes for students and staff, the measurement of these outcomes, and the methods with
which they will be measured.

88
Table 19
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1.Close achievement gap
between racial minorities and
White students.
1a. Report card scores
1b. STAAR test results
1a. Nine weeks’ reports from teachers
1b. Yearly report from the state
2.Improved sense of belonging
on campus for racial minority
students.
Self-reported student perceptions Twice a year survey from counselor
Internal Outcomes
3.Increased use of equitable
teaching practices.
3a. Classroom observations
3b. Lesson plans
Weekly instructional coaches’ log
tracking both 3a. and 3b.
4.Improved instructional
coaching practices.
4a. Self-reported teacher perception
4b. Coaches’ evaluations of teachers
4.a. Feedback from teachers via survey
4.b. Meeting each nine weeks between
coaches and administrators

Level 3: Behavior
Level three in the New Kirkpatrick Model refers to the application of new learning
acquired during training. Targeted outcomes are the results of a change in stakeholder behaviors
and organizational support. The critical behaviors that are necessary to achieve Pearl City ISD’s
performance goal and the required drivers that support those behaviors are discussed in this
section.
Critical Behaviors
There are several important behaviors that must be regularly employed by principals to
ensure the achievement of their goal. Principals must meet with instructional coaches regularly
using the scorecard to discuss progress toward desired outcomes. To ensure instructional coaches
are maximizing their time and efforts on the campus, principals must create lists of coaches’
duties and collaboratively establish schedules. Professional development calendars of available
training must be provided by principals in collaboration with district administrators and

89
instructional coaches. Lastly, principals will meet with district administrators to discuss, monitor,
and adjust the progress of instructional coaching on each campus. Table 20 gives a list of each of
these critical behaviors as well as methods and timing for their evaluations.
Table 20
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1.Principals meet with
coaches regularly to
discuss progress
towards indicators.
Number of meetings and
meeting agendas
Coaches’ scorecard
compared to principals’
scorecard
Every nine weeks
2.Principals create list
of duties and schedule
with instructional
coaches.
Job description and bi-
weekly calendars
Bi-weekly calendar for
campus administrators
Bi-Weekly
3.Principals create and
update a list of
professional
development
opportunities with
coaches.
List of professional
development opportunities
Professional development
calendar given to
instructional coaches
Twice a year
4.Principals meet with
district administrators
to discuss the progress
of instructional
coaching.
Observation notes and
scorecard
Comparison of principals’
and district administrators’
scorecard.
Monthly

Required Drivers
There are a number of drivers that will support principals’ effort in achieving
instructional coaching programs that will promote equitable practices. These drivers are related
to previously stated knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. One main influence
for both principals and Pearl City ISD is a value for instructional coaching. This value will be
made evident by the creation and implementation of policies and procedures that support
instructional coaching and promote equity in educational outcomes. Additionally, accountability
for principals and instructional coaches is an important influence. The drivers that support
behaviors related to each of these influences are categorized as reinforcing, encouraging,

90
rewarding, and monitoring (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 21 details each of these
drivers, the timing, and which critical behaviors they support.
Table 21

Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
District administrators will
communicate the
organizational vision at every
principal meeting
every week 1,2,
District administrators will
provide principals with
information on professional
development that supports the
needs of instructional coaches
in general.
every nine weeks 3
Encouraging
Principals will meet to discuss
successes towards equitable
teaching and closing
achievement gaps.
monthly 1,4
District administrators will
provide a space, time, and
structured job aids for
principals to collaboratively
create a job description, list of
duties, and schedules for
instructional coaches.
every nine weeks 1,2
Rewarding
The district will publicly
recognize principals who are
making gains towards
indicators on the Equity
Scorecard.
monthly newsletter or
principals’ meeting
1,2,3,4
Monitoring
District administrators will
establish concrete goals for
instructional coaching aligned
with the missions and
priorities of the district.
beginning of year 2,4

91
District administrators will
observe principals’ interaction
with instructional coaches and
provide feedback.
every six weeks 1,2,3

Organizational Support
In order for instructional coaching to promote the use of equitable instructional practices
and improved student learning outcomes, Pearl City ISD must support this effort. District
administrators can show their support for instructional coaching in a myriad of ways. Pearl City
ISD must consistently communicate with all stakeholders the goal of equity in student outcomes.
This central message must be at the forefront of all communication from the district to both
internal and external stakeholders. Promotion of this mission is the shared responsibility of
everyone in the school district but must be intentionally facilitated by district administration.
Pearl City must show a value for instructional coaching as a means to achieve equitable practices
by creating policies and procedures that support its implementation. This includes the creation of
an Equity Scorecard to enhance decision making, creating and rewriting policies related to
instructional coaching, consistent messaging around equity and instructional coaching, and
creating tools to evaluate instructional coaching. Pearl City ISD must also encourage and
recognize the success of principals with regards to their effective facilitation of instructional
coaching. This includes acknowledging principals’ efforts and success in monthly newsletters
and district communication as well as during principals’ meetings.
Level 2: Learning
Level two of the New Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model focuses on the learning acquired by
training participants. Learning consists of acquired knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and

92
commitment of employees as a result of their participation in the training. Training must be
carefully crafted to ensure alignment with the goals of the organization.
Learning Goals

Learning goals are created for the training to ensure that principals are able to perform
the critical behaviors necessary to meet their goal. These goals are also tied to the knowledge and
motivational influences for the stakeholders. Each goal will be assessed to determine that
principals’ acquired knowledge leads to enacted behavior and ultimately to goal achievement.
1. Create list of duties and schedule with instructional coaches (P)
2. Generate a list of professional development opportunities (C)
3. Explain how campus leadership impacts instructional coaching (V)
4. Summarize the need for equitable instructional practices and instructional coaching (V)
5. Create Equity Scorecard (P)
6. Plan and practice meetings with instructional coaches (P)
Program

During the beginning of the year principals’ retreat, each campus will be given their data
along with an example of an Equity Scorecard. Principals from all 11 schools will work in
collaboration to create Equity Scorecards for their campuses. Based on the performance
indicators on the Equity Scorecard, principals will then develop important roles, duties, and a
breakdown of time expenditures for instructional coaches on their campuses. A list of available
professional development opportunities will be provided from which principals will select the
most appropriate trainings for the needs of their campus.
During the afternoon sessions, principals will share stories of how their leadership
impacted instructional coaching on their campus. Principals will then be asked to reflect on how

93
they can better support the implementation of instructional coaching on their campus. A list of
important questions for regular meetings with instructional coaches will be developed based on
the Equity Scorecard.
During the school year, principals will discuss the progress of the instructional coaching
program at their weekly meetings. District administrators will observe principals’ interaction
with instructional coaches and provide feedback. The Equity Scorecard will be used to monitor
progress of instructional coaching on each campus.

Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Each component of the learning for the program must be evaluated to determine accuracy
and effectiveness towards meeting the learning goal. Principals should leave the training with the
appropriate knowledge, skills, attitudes, confidence, and commitment to successfully implement
an instructional coaching program that promotes equity. Table 22 details the methods with which
these components will be measured as well as the timing for each activity.
Table 22
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Think Pair Share during retreat
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Self-reviewed checklist of skills during retreat
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion of value and importance during retreat, during weekly meetings
Observation of meetings with coaches after retreat
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion of issues, concerns, and barriers during and after
Peer check-ins during weekly meetings
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions with peers during retreat
Self-reports during weekly meetings

94

Level 1: Reaction
Level one of the New Kirkpatrick Evaluation Models refers to participants’ reaction to
the training including their satisfaction, engagement, and perceived relevance of training to their
work. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) argued that this is the least important of the four levels
in determining the effectiveness of the training program. However, there are simple and
inexpensive ways to measure participants’ favorable opinions of the training. Table 23 includes
the methods that will be used to determine principals’ reactions to the proposed training
program.
Table 23
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Principals asking meaningful questions During retreat
Relevance
Facilitator pulse check via discussion During retreat
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check (trainers’ notes) During retreat

Evaluation Tools
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) posited that effective training programs should be
evaluated at all four levels of planning and implementation. Evaluation can be both formative
and summative and include tools such as surveys, knowledge tests, observations, interviews,
pulse checks, and teach backs. The evaluation for level one and two of this program are
formative and performed by the trainer during the retreat. Analysis of this formative assessment
will allow the trainer to immediately adjust instruction to meet the needs of the principals, alert
district administrators of principals who may need more support throughout the year and add

95
topics to be addressed during subsequent principals’ meetings. Later, a summative survey
evaluation focusing on Levels three and four of the training will be completed by retreat
participants. These evaluations will be used to determine the effectiveness of the training at
adding to the knowledge, skills, confidence, and commitment of participants; promoting critical
behaviors that support the goal of stakeholders; and meeting specific outcomes that indicate
overall achievement of the stakeholder goal. The following section will detail the evaluation
tools for during and after the proposed training plan for Pearl City ISD principals.
Formative Evaluation During the Program Implementation

Formative evaluation during the program is important for trainers to monitor and adjust
participant engagement and learning and make adjustments if necessary (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). To that end, an evaluative tool, Appendix A, is recommended to be
completed by the trainer during the training. The tool allows for the trainer to record whether
principals have required knowledge (level two); exhibit appropriate skills, attitude, confidence,
commitment, and engagement (level two); and are satisfied with the training (level one).
Additionally, trainers can use this tool to take notes of participants’ anticipated needs, supports
that the organization can provide, and other pertinent feedback and observations. The goal of the
tool is to increase the effectiveness of the training and the likelihood that knowledge and skills
acquired during the training will translate to critical behaviors and expected outcomes for the
organization.
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation

As recommended by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) a Blended Evaluation tool
including both survey items with rating scales as well as open ended questions will be used to
evaluate levels three and four of the training (see Appendix B). Level one and two of this

96
training will be evaluated during the training; they are not incorporated in the delayed evaluation
instrument. This survey includes questions adapted from those recommended by Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) and will be taken by principals nine weeks after the training retreat in order to
provide them with an opportunity to apply their learning from training in the school context. The
survey will evaluate principals’ critical behaviors and organizational levers (level 3) as well as
results (level 4). The tool will help to determine whether the training was effective at promoting
necessary behaviors, how the organization is supporting or impeding those critical behaviors, and
whether principals are achieving their goal of implementing an instructional coaching program
that promotes equity.
Data Analysis and Reporting
Results from the evaluation tools will be shared with Pearl City ISD administrators and
school principals. The purpose of the report is to show principals’ progress toward achieving the
performance goal. In accordance with Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) the report will be brief,
direct, and use visuals to deliver evidence of the program's success towards achieving the district’s
goal of improving equity through instructional coaching. Graphs will include percentages of
principals that are engaged in all four critical behaviors, level four outcomes, and barriers that
persist within the organization. This report is intended to be used by principals and district
administrators during their weekly meetings in an effort to close identified gaps and support goal
achievement. Figure 4 is an example of a graph to be included in the report.

97
Figure 4
Principals’ Progress Toward Implementing Instructional Coaching Program Promoting Equity

Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was used in developing a training to ensure the
principals of Pearl City ISD achieve their goal of creating and implementing an instructional
coaching program that promotes the use of equitable instructional practices. Using this model in
conjunction with the validated knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence gaps assisted
with identifying appropriate methods to address the needs of principals and the district. The New

98
World Kirkpatrick model (2016) also provided a framework to evaluate the effectiveness of the
proposed training program. Based on this model, the proposed training will meet the
expectations of the district and if not, the evaluation tools will be able to identify the gaps and
allow time to address and eliminate them.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
The study utilized the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework for its evaluation.
This approach was practical for this problem of practice evaluation study as it focuses on the
identification of “the active ingredients of effective products and processes” (Clark & Estes,
2008, p. 1). Identifying these key ingredients enabled the development of targeted solutions and
strategies to the specific organization. This analysis framework facilitated the diagnosis of
performance gaps caused by knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences within a
single organization. The process maximizes the value to individual organizations and increases
the likelihood of improving performance-based recommendation resulting from the evaluation.
The nature of this case study design allowed for an in-depth analysis of the experiences
of principals in a particular school district as an isolated group (Creswell, 2014; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The researcher must be or become intimately familiar with the organization. The
limitation of this specificity means that findings and recommendations may not be generalizable
to other organizations. Countering this limitation, however, is the high value of
recommendations resulting from the data collection and analysis for the Pearl City ISD.
Finally, this organizational specific methodology enabled the case study to be completed
independent of many external influences and variables. Participation in the study was completely

99
voluntary and participants were interviewed at a time most convenient for them. Additionally,
interviews were conducted in a timely manner and completed over video conference.
Limitations and Delimitations
All research, whether quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods, has limitations and
delimitations. Limitations are factors that cannot be controlled by the researcher. They exist in
the method, design, and approach of a study (Nenty & Nenty, 2009). One limitation of this study
was time. Principals have very busy schedules and these interviews came at a time when
principals and schools were adjusting to virtual learning because of school closures due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. Their focus during this time was preparing the teachers, staff, and students
for this crucial time. Additionally, interviews that were initially intended to be face to face took
place virtually using zoom. Another possible limitation was social desirability of responses.
Principals, even after being assured of anonymity, may have aligned their responses with what
they perceived as being acceptable to the district or other outside entities and avoided negative
responses (Preti & Mitotto, 2011). A final limitation of this study was the inability to conduct
observation of leadership meetings due to COVID-19 and restrictions around social interactions.
This limitation, however, may have been mitigated by document analysis of previous agendas
from these meetings.
Delimitations are factors that can be controlled by the researcher and usually emerge
from a desire to focus the study (Nenty & Nenty, 2009). This study could have been conducted at
a larger district with a more robust stakeholder population. The decision to focus on Pearl City
ISD was made based on increased access and openness of the district administrators to be a focus
of study.

100
Implications for Practice
From this research and relevant literature, three key implications for principals who seek
to create and implement instructional coaching programs that promote equity have been
identified. Definitive job descriptions and schedules are significant in the successful
implementation of instructional coaching (Betrand et al., 2015; Walkowiak, 2016). Findings
from this study indicated that most principals in Pearl City ISD did not have schedules for their
instructional coaches. As a result, many coaches dealt with competing priorities in their daily
duties that were in conflict with their primary role. The recommendation for this influence was
for principals and instructional coaches to collaboratively create schedules that reflect the
priorities of the campus for the position. This recommendation could be broadly applied in K-12
schools that utilize instructional coaching. School campuses have varied needs that are best
identified and addressed by their administrators and instructional leaders.
Mchenry et al. (2017) found that instructional coaching was more effective on campus
when the practice is valued and supported by administrators (Teemant, 2013). Findings about the
value of instructional coaching in Pearl City ISD were mixed. Principals acknowledged that the
district allocated financial resources to ensure that instructional coaching positions were funded,
yet policies, professional development, and evaluation of instructional coaching was lacking.
There are several recommendations offered to address these gaps that can be implemented in K-
12 districts and campuses. First, districts should include all involved stakeholders in decisions
about the procurement of grant funds. Those expected to implement the requirements of the grant
should have a clear understanding of the expectations have buy in to the program. Secondly, the
creation and use of an Equity Scorecard has been shown to aid with identifying student needs
and indicators of progress towards meeting those needs (Harris & Bensimon, 2007). The Equity

101
Scorecard is recommended as a tool to evaluate the effectiveness of a campus instructional
coaching program. Determining the focus and identifying progress measures towards goal
achievement not only improve the implementation of instructional coaching, it is an indicator of
the campus and district’s value of the practice. The targets set in the Equity Scorecard should be
used by principals as they evaluate which professional development opportunities best suit the
needs of the instructional coaches.
Mangin and Dunsmore (2014) found that professional development has a significant
impact on how instructional coaching is enacted on a campus. A recommendation was suggested
to provide principals with information on professional development that supports the needs of
instructional coaches in general. After analyzing that list, principals would determine which
learning opportunities would best serve their specific instructional coaches based on their
respective contexts that can be utilized in a larger context for K-1 schools to improve outcomes
of instructional coaching. This plan can be utilized by any school principal or district wishing to
provide efficient and targeted training for their instructional coaches.
Future Research
Several opportunities for future research have emerged from this evaluative study. There
is an increasing diverse population of students in K-12 schools, as indicated in Chapter Two.
Research suggests several practices that promote equity, yet there is a need for additional
research specifically addressing instructional coaching practices that are beneficial to equitable
pedagogical practices. Future research should be dedicated to identifying and quantifying the
effectiveness of instructional coaching practices on promoting equitable practices.
Procurement of grants provides opportunities that districts may not otherwise have due to
limited funding. The inconsistent knowledge of policies, implementation, and evaluative

102
components of the grant in this district indicates a need to study how grants impact district and
school policies. Further study should be devoted to the process of applying for grants, the
stakeholders included in this process, and the impact on district policy and personnel.
Research confirms that instructional coaching is an effective form of professional
development. Certain instructional coaching practices may have larger effect sizes than others on
improving teacher instructional practices. Additional research should also be devoted to studying
the impact that instructional coaching has on teacher pedagogy.
While this study focused on principals, further organizational research should be
conducted with students as the primary stakeholder. A true measure of the implementation and
effectiveness of equitable instructional practices is the improvement of students’ outcomes and
closing of gaps in student learning. Future studies that assign students as the stakeholder of focus
would be valuable.
Conclusion
This evaluation study and dissertation sought to determine the extent to which Pearl City
ISD was meeting its organizational goal to provide professional learning opportunities to
teachers that are relevant, effective, evaluated and ongoing by the end of the 2019-20 school
year. The design and analysis, based on Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework focuses
on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting their goal. Principals
were identified as the primary stakeholder for this study. The performance goal for principals
was related to their ability to create and implement instructional coaching programs that promote
equitable practices.
This qualitative study revealed that principals, in general, possess knowledge of best
practices for instructional coaching. However, there were gaps in their knowledge of developing

103
job descriptions, establishing schedules, and determining effective professional development for
instructional coaches. Motivation varied for principals, but overall, they showed a lack of value
for instructional coaching as a method to promote equity and did not attribute the success of
instructional coaching to their own leadership. Finally, outside of providing financial support, the
district lacked policies, procedures, and value for promoting effective instructional coaching.
The findings from this study were used to develop a comprehensive training program
incorporating specific content-based recommendations. The New World Kirkpatrick model
(2016) assisted with the creation of tools to evaluate the effectiveness of this program in
producing desired outcomes. Once implemented, this program will alleviate the identified gaps
in knowledge and motivation for principals and organizational structure for the district and as
such better equip principals to meet their performance goal and Pearl City ISD’s organizational
goal. Given the essential role principals play as school leaders and the vital impact instructional
coaches can have in promoting equity for students, principals’ knowledge of and value for
instructional coaching can have a lasting impact on teachers and students. By providing
principals this professional development opportunity to increase their knowledge and motivation
and by implementing policies and procedures, the school district can capitalize on their
instructional coaches in a way that ensures an equitable education for all students

104
References
Abrego, C. & Pankake, A. (2011) The district-wide sustainability of a professional learning
community during leadership change at the superintendent level. Administrative Issues
Journal: Education, Practice, and Research 1(1), 3-13.
Aguilar, Elena (2020). Coaching for Equity. Jossey-Bass.
Anderman, E. & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. http://www.education.com/
reference/article/attribution-theory/
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing (1st
ed.). Longman.
Balfanz, R., Byrnes, V., & Fox, J. (2014) Sent home and put off-track: the antecedents,
disproportionalities, and consequences of being suspended in the ninth grade. Journal of
Applied Research on Children: Informing Policy for Children at Risk 5(2), 1-19.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 9, 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bainbridge, W.L. & Lasley, T.J. (2002). Demographics, diversity, and k-12 accountability: the
challenge of closing the achievement gap. Education and Urban Society, 34(4), 422-437
Bertrand, M., Huguet, A., & Marsh, J. (2015) Using data to alter instructional practice: The
mediating role of coaches and professional learning communities. Teachers College
Record, 117, 1-40.
Billingsley, B., DeMatthews, D., Connally, K., & McLeskey, J. (2018) Leadership for effective
inclusive schools: considerations for preparation and reform. Australasian Journal of
Special and Inclusive Education, 42(1), 65-81
Blanton, L.P., Pugach, M.C., & Boveda, M. (2018) Interrogating the intersections between

105
general and special education in the history of teacher reform. Journal of Teacher
Education 69(4), 354-366. https://doi.org/10.177/00487118778539
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (5th
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research
Journal 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ090207
Boston, M.D., Henrick, E.C., Gibbons, L.K., Berebitsky, D., & Colby, G.T. (2017). Investigating
how to support principals as instructional leaders in mathematics. Journal of Research on
Leadership Education, 12(3), 183-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775116640254
Brown, S., Browning, S., & Harrell, S. (2017) Models of influence on mathematics instructional
coaches. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 25(5), 566-588. https://doi.org/
10.1080/13611267.2017.1416264
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. CEP Press.
Collaborative for Academic Social and Emotional Learning. (2020, July). What is
social and emotional learning (SEL)?. https://casel.org
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2020, August 15). Effective social
and emotional learning programs.
http://static.squarespace.com/static/513f79f9e4b05ce7b70e9673/t/526a220de4b00a92c90
436ba/1382687245993/2013-casel-guide.pdf.
Cobb, P., Jackson, K., Smith, T., Sorum, M., & Henrick, E. (2013). Design research with
educational systems: investigating and supporting improvements in the quality of

106
mathematics teaching and learning at scale. National Society for the Study of Education,
112(2), 320-349.
Cramer, E.D., Pellegrini-Lafont, C., & Gonzalez, L. (2014). Towards culturally responsive and
integrated instruction for all learners: the integrated learning model. Interdisciplinary
Journal of Teaching and Learning 4(2), 110-124.
Darling-Hammond, L., Kohn, A., Meier, D., Sizer, T., & Wood, G. (2004). From “Separate but
Equal” to “No Child Left Behind”: The collision of new standards and old inequities. In
D. Meier & G. Wood (eds.), Many children left behind (pp. 3–32). Beacon Press
Darling- Hammond (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to
equity will determine Our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334.

Department of Developmental Services. (2008). Fact book.
http://www.dds.ca.gov/FactsStats/docs/factbook_11th.pdf
Desimone, L. & Pak, K. (2016) Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development.
Theory Into Practice 56(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1241947
Desravines, J., Aquino, J., & Fenton, B. (2016). Breakthrough principals: a step-by-step guide to
building stronger schools. Jossey-Bass.
Dowd, A.C., & Shieh, L.T. (2013). Community college financing: equity, efficiency, and

accountability. The NEA Almanac of Higher Education, 37-65.
Dubnick, M. (2014). Accountability as cultural keyword. In M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T.
Schillemans (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 23–28). Oxford
University Press.
Duncan, H. & Stock, M. (2010) Mentoring as a professional development strategy for
instructional coaches: Who mentors the mentors? Planning and Changing, 40, 57-69.

107
Dyer, J., Gregersen, H., & Christensen, C. (2011). Innovator's DNA: Mastering the five skills of
disruptive innovators. Harvard Business School Press.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. http://www.
education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Einsenbach, R., Watson, K., Rajnandini, P. (1999) Transformational leadership in the context of
organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 80-89.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09534819910263631
Fischetti, J. (2018). Reframing teacher education of learning equity. Peabody Journal of
Education 93(3), 267-271. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161856X.2018.1469228
Frattura, E. & Capper, C. A. (2006) Segregated programs versus integrated comprehensive
service delivery for all learners: assessing the differences. Remedial and Special Education
27(6), 355-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193506070060501
Freire, P. (1990) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Seabury Press.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Gallucci, C., Van Lare, M.D., Yoon, I.H., & Boatright, B. (2010). Instructional coaching:
building theory about the role and organizational support for professional learning.
American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 919-963.
Gan, Z., Nang, H. & Mu, K. (2018). Trainee teachers’ experiences of classroom feedback
practices and their motivation to learn. Journal of Education for Teaching, 44(4), 505-
510. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2018.1450956
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming

108
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
GLSEN (2015) The 2015 national school climate survey: key findings on the experiences of
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth in our nation’s schools. Gay, Lesbian,
Straight Education Network.
Green, T.L. (2016) Community-based equity audits: a practical approach for educational leaders
to support equitable community-school improvements. Educational Administration
Quarterly 53(1), 3-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316X16672513
Gregory, A., Skiba, J., & Noguera, P.A. (2010) The achievement gap and the discipline gap: to
sides of the same coin?. Educational Researcher 39(1), 59-68.
https://doi.org/10.310/001189x0935761
Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: a passing fancy that
refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221-239. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15700760500244793
Hammond, Z. (2015) Culturally responsive teaching & the brain: promoting authentic
engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically divers students. Corwin Press.
Harris, F. & Bensimon, E.M. (2007). The equity scorecard: a collaborative approach to assess
and respond to racial/ethnic disparities in student outcomes. New Directions for Student
Services, 120, 77-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research,
77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hattie, J., Fisher, D., & N. Frey (2017) Visible learning for mathematics. Corwin Press.
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of
Southern California Urban Education, Spring/Summer, 17–19.

109
Hopkins, M., Ozimek, D., & Sweet, T. (2016) Mathematics coaching and instructional reform:
individual and collective change. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 46, 215-230.
Hulleman C.S., Barron K.E., Kosovich J.J., Lazowski R.A. (2016). Student motivation: Current
theories, constructs, and interventions within an expectancy-value framework. In:
Lipnevich A., Preckel F., Roberts R. (Eds.) Psychosocial Skills and School Systems in the
21st Century (pp.241-278). Springer.
Hulleman, C.S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B., & Harachiewicz, J.M. (2010). Enhancing interest and
performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4),
880-895. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019506
Hung, M., Smith, W.A., Voss, M.W., Franklin, J.D., Gu, Y., & Bounsanga, J. (2020). Exploring
student achievement gaps in school districts across the united states. Education and
Urban Society, 52(2), 175-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124519833442
James-Ward, C. & Abuyen, J. (2015). McRel leadership responsibilities through the lens of data:
the critical nine. Global Education Review, 2(3), 82-93.
Killion, J. (2012). Coaching in the K–12 context. In S. J. Fletcher & C. A. Mullen(Eds.), The

SAGE handbook of mentoring and coaching in education (pp. 273–294). SAGE.

King, M.B. & Bouchard, K. (2011). The capacity to build organizational capacity in schools.
Journal of Educational Administration 49(6), 653-669.
https://doi.org/10.1108/0957823111117802
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
ATD Press.
Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. G. (2013). Do learners really know what’s best? Urban
legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48, 169 - 183

110
Knapp, M. (2017) An autoethnography of a (reluctant) teacher leader. The Journal of
Mathematical Behavior 46, 251-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.02.004
Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: a partnership approach to improving instruction.
Corwin Press.
Knight, J. (2011). Unmistakable impact: a partnership approach for dramatically improving

instruction. Corwin.

Knight, J. & van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2012) Instructional coaching: a focus on practice. Coaching:
An International Journey of Theory, Research and Practice 5(2), 100-112.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2012.707668
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.
Cambridge Adult Education.
Koyama, J. (2014). Principals as bricoleurs: making sense and making do in an era of
accountability. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(2), 279-304.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13492796
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41, 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lazowski, R.A., & Hulleman, C.S. (2016). Motivation interventions in education: a
meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 602-640.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315617832
Lee, M., Walker, A., & Ling Chui, Y. (2012). Contrasting effects of instructional leadership
practices on student learning in a high accountability context. Journal of Educational
Administration, 50(5), 586–611.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences

111
student learning. The Wallace Foundation
Lim, N., Haddad, A., & Daugherty, L. (2013). Implementation of The DOD Diversity and
Inclusion Strategic Plan: A Framework for Change Through Accountability. Rand
Corporation.
Locke, L. & McKenzie, K. (2014) Distributed leadership: a good theory but what if leaders
won’t, don’t know how, or can’t lead? Journal of School Leadership, 24,164-188.
Lockwood, J. R., McCombs, J. S., & Marsh, J. (2010). Linking reading coaches and student
achievement: Evidence from Florida middle schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 32(3), 372–388. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373710373388
Losen, D., Hodson, C., Keith, M.A., Morrison, K., & Belway, S. (2015) Are we closing the
school discipline gap?. The Center for Civil Rights Remedies
Main, K. & Pendergast, D. (2015) Core feature of effective continuing professional development
for the middle years: a tool for reflection. Research in Middle Level Education, 38(10), 1-
18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2015.11658177
Mangin, M.M., & Dunsmore, K. (2014) How the framing of instructional coaching as lever for
systemic or individual reform influences the enactment of coaching. Educational
Administration Quarterly 2015, 51(2), 179-213.
Marchbanks, M.P., Blake, J.J., Booth, E.A., Carmichael, D., Seibert, A.L., & Fabelo, T. (2015)
The economic effects of exclusionary discipline on grade retention and high school
dropout. Closing the School Discipline Gap: Equitable Remedies for Excessive Exclusion
59-74.
Marsh, J. A. (2012). Interventions promoting educators’ use of data: Research insights and gaps.
Teachers College Record, 114(11), 1–48.

112
Marsh, J.A., & Farrell, C.C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data driven decision
making: A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership 43(2), 269-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214537229
Martin, G. E., Danzig, A. B., Wright, W. F., Flanary, R. A., & Orr, M. T. (2017). School leader
internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership experience (4th ed.).
Routledge.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
Mayer, R.E. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning.
Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.207/S15326985EP3801_6
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research. Sage Publications.
Mchenry, N., Borger,L., & Liable-Sands, L. (2017) A novel approach to professional
development in middle school science: instructional coaching by university professors to
improve the instructional core. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching 6(2), 59-74.
https://doi.org/10.5340/jct.v6n2p59
Merrell, K. W., & Gueldner, B. A. (2010). Social and emotional learning curricula: A review of
selected programs. In K. W. Merrell & B. A. Gueldner (Eds.), Social and emotional
learning in the classroom: Promoting mental health and academic success (pp. 23–47).
Guilford Press.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Mikulyuk, A.B. & Braddock, J. H. (2018) K-12 school diversity and social cohesion: evidence in
support of a compelling state interest. Education and Urban Society, 50(1), 5-37.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124516678045

113
Murdock, T.B., & Bolch, M.B. (2005) Risk and protective factors for poor school adjustment in
lesbian and bisexual high school youth: variable and person-centered analyses.
Psychology in the Schools 42(2), 159-172.
Nenty, H., & Nenty, H. (2009). Writing a quantitative research thesis. International Journal of
Educational Sciences, 1(1), 19-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2009.1188972
Norton, J. (2001) A storybook breakthrough. Journal of Staff Development, 22, 22-25.
Pashler, H., McDaniel,M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts
and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,9, 106–119.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
Pintrich, P.R. (2003) A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology. 95(4), 667-686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Preti, A., & Miotto, P. (2011) Self-deception, social desirability, and psychopathy. Behavioral
and Brain Science, 34(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10002487
Psencik, K., Mitrani, V., & Coleman, R. (2019). The power of coaching: fort wayne’s model
shows what an intentional learning system can accomplish. The Learning Professional
40(6), 54-57
Rath, T., & Conchie, B. (2009). Strengths based leadership: great leader, teams, and why people
follow them. Gallop Press.
Reardon, S. F. (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 70(8),
10-16.
Ritter, G.W. (2018) Reviewing the progress of school discipline reform. Peabody Journal of
Education 93(2), 133-138. https:///doi.org/10.1080/016956X.2018.1435034

114
Robinson, L. R. (2016). In Black and White: The achievement gap and the integration of
schools. https://digitalcommons.kent.edu/ugresearch /2016/2016all/26/
Rubel, L.H. (2017). Equity-directed instructional practices: beyond the dominant perspective.
Journal of Urban Mathematics Education 10(2), 66-105. http://education.gsu.edu/JUME
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers
College Press.
Russell, S.T., Seif, H., & Truong, N.L. (2001) School outcomes of sexual minority youth in the
united states: evidence from a national study. Journal of Adolescence 24(1), 111-127.
Schein, E.H. (2004) Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey- Bass.

Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. http://
www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Sharp, L. (2016) ESEA reauthorization: An overview of the every student succeeds act. Texas
Journal of Literacy Education 4(1), 9-13.
Spillane, J. (2005) Distributive leadership. The Educational Forum, 69, 143-150.
https://doi.org/10.108-/00131720508984678
Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. N. (2004). Introduction. In B. Stecher & S. N. Kirby, Organizational
improvement and accountability: Lessons for education from other sectors (pp. 1–7).
Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. http://www.rand.org/publications/MG/MG136/
Theoharis, G. & Scalan, M. (2015). Leadership for increasingly diverse schools. Routledge
Trenerry & Paradies (2012). Organizational assessment: an overlooked approach to managing
diversity and addressing racism in the workplace. Journal of Diversity Management 7(1),
11-26.
Walkowiak, T. (2016) Five essential practices for communication: the work of instructional

115
Coaches. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas,

89(1), 14-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2015.1121121

Waters, T., Marzano, R., McNulty, B. (2003) Balanced leadership: what 30 years of research
tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Mid-Continent Regional
Educational Lab, 2-21.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and
emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.92.4.54
Wergin, J.F. (2001). Beyond carrots and sticks: what really motivates faculty. Liberal Education,
87(1), 50.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Wright, L.L. (2008). Merits and limitations of distributive leadership: Experiences and
understandings of school principals. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration
and Policy, 69, 1-32.

116
Appendix A

I would like to begin with expressing my gratitude for agreeing to participate in my study. Thank
you taking some time out of your busy schedule to meet with me and answer some questions. I
plan for this interview to last for about an hour.
I am currently enrolled in a doctoral program at the University of Southern California and am
conducting a study exploring the relationship between principals and instructional coaching.
I am not here to make a professional assessment or judgment of your performance as a principal.
I am here solely as a researcher collecting data for my study. The information shared with me
will be placed in my study as part of the data collection. In addition, this interview is completely
confidential and neither your name nor responses will not be disclosed to anyone or anywhere
outside the scope of this study. While a direct quote may be used, I will not provide your name
specifically and will make the best effort possible to remove any potential identifying data
information. I will gladly provide you with a copy of my final product upon request.
During the interview, I will be using several recording devices to assist me in capturing all of
your responses accurately and completely. This recording will not be shared with anyone outside
the scope of this project. The recording will be transferred to my password-protected files on a
cloud file storage account and deleted from the recording device immediately upon transfer. The
recording will then be destroyed after two years from the date my dissertation defense is
approved.
Do you have any questions about the study before we get started? If not, I would like your
permission to begin the interview. May I also have your permission to record this conversation?
General
1. How long have you worked in K-12 schools?
a. How much of that time have you been a principal?
2. How long have you worked with instructional coaches?
Knowledge

1. What are your students’ needs?
a. How do students’ needs determine teachers’ needs in supporting their learning
and closing achievement gaps?

117
b. How do students’ need affect the allocation of instructional coaches to teachers?
2. How do you define effective instructional coaching?
a. What are the factors that impact instructional coaching effectiveness of a campus?
3. What are some effective instructional coaching strategies you are familiar with?
4. Tell me what the typical coaching cycle looks like on your campus?
a. Are you familiar with how many teachers on your campus participate in these
cycles?
5. What types of professional learning opportunities are provided for instructional coaches?
6. What strategies do you use to evaluate the effectiveness of your instructional coaches?
Motivation
1. What are the factors that impact instructional coaching effectiveness on your campus?
2. How does the instructional coach assist with the academic performance of students?
3. What is the impact of instructional coaching on your campus?
4. What impact has the instructional coach had on fostering teacher professional learning?
5. What do you think would be different if there was not an instructional coach at your
school?
Organization Influence
1. How is instructional coaching valued by the district?
2. What efforts does the district employ to support instructional coaching?
3. In what ways does the district evaluate the effectiveness of instructional coaching on your
campus?
4. How does the district hold principals accountable for instructional coaching on their
campuses?

118
Appendix B

Document Analysis Protocol

Date Topic Instructional Coaching Principal
Accountability
Educational
Equity
Other related
topic

119
Appendix C
Evaluation Tool for Principal Retreat Trainer

Trainer:
Date:

Trainer will monitor principals during the retreat and complete the form to evaluate their
participation and learning.

Component

Participants Notes

1-3 4-6 7-9 10+
Principals actively
engaged in retreat
activities

Principals answered posed
questions during the retreat

During Think Pair Share,
principals discussed
important duties and
schedules related to
instructional coaches

Principals were able to
select appropriate
professional development

Principals discuss ways in
which their leadership
impacts instructional
coaching

Principals discuss the need
for equitable practices

120
Principals participate in the
development of The Equity
Score Board

Principals demonstrate an
ability to engage in critical,
reflective conversations
with instructional coaches

Principals asked
meaningful questions
throughout the training

Principals report that the
training was relevant

Principals express
satisfaction with the
training room and
accommodations during
their self-check

Principals’ suggested
supports
Notes:

Principal’s anticipated
barriers
Notes:

Potential topics for future
principal meetings
Notes:
Principals in need of
additional administrative
support
Notes:

121
Appendix D
Delayed Evaluation - Principal Survey

INSTRUCTIONS: Using this rating scale, circle the rating that best describes your current level
of on the-the-job application for each of the listed behaviors.

1-Little or no application
2-Mild degree of application
3-Moderate degree of application
4-Strong degree of application
5-Very strong degree of application, and desire to help others do the same

Meet with coaches regularly to discuss progress
towards indicators
1 2 3 4 5
Create list of duties and schedule with instructional
coaches
1 2 3 4 5
Create and update a list of professional development
opportunities with coaches
1 2 3 4 5
Meet with district administrators regarding progress
regarding instructional coaching
1 2 3 4 5

If you circled 4 or below, please indicate the reasons (check all that apply):
❏ I do not have the necessary knowledge and skills
❏ I do not have a clear picture of what is expected of me
❏ I have other, higher priorities
❏ I do not have the necessary resources to apply what I learned
❏ I do not have the support to apply what I learned
❏ The training did not give me the confidence to apply what I learned
❏ I do not think what I learned will work
❏ Other (please explain)

I am already seeing positive results from the training.

122
I have seen an impact in the following areas as a result of applying what I learned (check all that
apply):
❏ Closing student achievement gap between racial minority and White students
❏ Improved student sense of belonging
❏ Increased use of culturally responsive instruction
❏ Improved instructional coaching practices
❏ Increased accountability for instructional coaching
❏ Other (please explain):

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study employed the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to evaluate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting principals’ efforts toward creating and implementing instructional coaching programs that promote equity. A qualitative research process was designed and conducted using interviews of seven principals in one district and documents from leadership meetings to collect data for analysis. The evaluation identified gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational structures. Key findings showed that the school district lacked policies, procedures, and tools for evaluating instructional coaching, which was interpreted by stakeholders as a lack of value. Additionally, findings showed that principals attributed the success and failure of instructional coaching to factors outside of their control. Based on these results, content-specific recommendations were used to design an integrated training program. These recommendations included the creation of an Equity Scorecard to evaluate instructional coaching, schedules to prioritize important duties of instructional coaches, and regular collaborative discussions among principals to validate their impact on instructional coaching. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Model was used to develop evaluative tools for this program at all four levels: reaction, knowledge, behavior, and outcomes.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The impact of faculty interactions on online student sense of belonging: an evaluation study

PDF

Impact of mindfulness on early education teacher well-being: an evaluation study

PDF

Where are all the ""leadhers""? Female leaders' experiences in finance

PDF

One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China

PDF

Manager leadership skills in the context of a new business strategy initiative: an evaluative study

PDF

Leadership readiness: evaluating the effectiveness for developing managers as coaches

PDF

Effective practices for managing staff performance in higher education: an exploratory study

PDF

The impact of advanced technologies on the workplace and the workforce: an evaluation study

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

Preventing excessive force incidents by improving police training: an evaluation study of a use-of-force training program

PDF

Incentivizing for-profit investment in the non-profit initiatives of the Community Cooperative: an evaluation study

PDF

The board fundraising challenge after nonprofit mergers: an evaluation study

PDF

Barriers to gender equity in K-12 educational leadership: an evaluation study

PDF

Utilizing data analytics in the field of physical security: an exploratory study

PDF

Increasing strategic investments of philanthropic funding in nonprofit organizations

PDF

Evaluation of New Teacher Induction (NTI) mentor practice for developing NTI teachers capable of differentiating instruction to address cultural diversity, equity, and learner variability

PDF

The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

PDF

Minding the gap: an evaluation of faculty, staff and administrator readiness to close equity gaps at the California State University

PDF

Instructional technology integration in a parochial school district: an evaluation study

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

Asset Metadata

Creator Tillmon (Johnson), Kerisha (author)

Core Title Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 12/07/2020

Defense Date 09/21/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag educational equity,instructional coaches,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals,professional development

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Phillips, Jennifer (committee chair), Robles, Darlene (committee member), Seli, Helena (committee member)

Creator Email kerishaj@usc.edu,kstillmon@utexas.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-404402

Unique identifier UC11668799

Identifier etd-TillmonJoh-9179.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-404402 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TillmonJoh-9179.pdf

Dmrecord 404402

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Tillmon (Johnson), Kerisha

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA