Instructional coaches outline teacher‑support model, emphasize data‑driven interventions

Instructional coaches Christine McCriedi (Pence) and Becky Thompson (Washington) presented to the board on Nov. 18, explaining how coaching cycles and data use support teacher practice and student learning.

They described coaching as a collaborative, non‑evaluative process that includes co‑planning, modeling lessons, analyzing student data and short‑cycle check‑ins. Coaches said they use FastBridge benchmark and progress‑monitoring data (words‑per‑minute fluency and other measures) to form intervention groups and to track progress every six weeks. The presenters noted that coaching work ranges from hallway check‑ins to structured six‑week impact cycles and includes partnering with building leadership teams and external AEA consultants for targeted supports.

Why it matters: the coaches framed their work as an instructional lever to accelerate student learning and build teacher capacity, and they asked the board to view coaching investments as complementary to facilities and other district priorities.

Question and answer: board members asked about the most impactful data sources and how coaching is coordinated across buildings; coaches said FastBridge is a core tool and described increased cross‑building collaboration this year. The coaches also outlined how they identify priorities for literacy and interventions (e.g., letter‑sound fluency in kindergarten) and how they support implementation fidelity.

Next steps: coaches will continue partnering with principals and central staff; the board was invited to review examples of coaching cycles and resources.

(Article sources: coach presentation and subsequent Q&A in meeting transcript.)