Yesterday, I published a blog post encouraging the Ohio Department of Education to allocate ESSER funds to supply adequate technology integration support via tech coaches to all teachers across the state. In full disclosure, it was an assignment for my Public Policy and Administration class in one of my last semesters working toward my Ed.D. at Vanderbilt University. I’ve spent more hours than I can count on assignments like these, and I finally decided to share this one with the world because I am super passionate about this issue. After debating for days if I should hit the publish button, I decided, what the heck!? I’m really glad I did.
I’ve received some great comments and push back on some of the ideas. On one hand, it makes the imposter syndrome creep in… do I really know what I’m talking about? And on the other, it creates dialogue around a really important issue. It has re-lit a fire for me. And it has also made me question a lot of things.
The primary push back has been around the term “tech coach.” That the focus should be on high-quality instruction. We need to be focused on student learning. We need academic and instructional design coaches before we focus on tech. I agree with all of these things. What is puzzling to me, is that these are all things that I view as responsibilities of a “tech coach.”
This is where my own reckoning really begins.
For nine years I have served as a tech coach at both the building and district level, I have grown a team of tech coaches from one to 14 in six years, I have served on national leadership committees for tech coaches where I have been fortunate to engage with tech coaches across the country and in other parts of the world. If I had a dollar for every conversation that has circled around defining the role of a tech coach, I might be writing this post from Fiji (okay, at least from a newer computer!).
We know what we can do, but we can’t convince everyone else on a wide scale. We still get asked to fix the projector. We still get called “the Google lady.” We still get asked to lead PD on a specific edtech tool. We still get push back that the focus isn’t on technology right now. Publishing yesterday’s post and hearing the feedback (from the kind souls who were nice enough to read my post in the first place), finally made me stop and say in the back of my mind, “if you think it’s everyone else… maybe it’s actually you!”
Meaning… if we think no one understands what we really do, maybe we aren’t explaining it correctly.
So let me take a first stab at how I’m going to try to reframe the thinking around a “tech coach.” It’s sure to leave me (and you) with more questions than answers. To start, I’ve never put too much weight into the semantics of a title. Our first episode of Restart Recharge Podcast made me realize that tech coaches have hundreds of titles. Plus, I always felt like “other duties as assigned” sort of end up rendering a title only half-right anyway. The past few months, and 24 hours in particular, have made me realize that maybe I was a bit shortsighted on this one. After quickly throwing out the idea to my team for a name change, they jumped on the idea to help us remove “tech” out of the perceived focus of all we do. More to come on this, but I’d love to hear any thoughts or suggestions you have.
Secondly, my colleague Brooke Conklin always says, “I’m not a tech tool salesperson. I’m focused on improving instruction.” As tech coaches, we can pigeon hole our own selves into being the “[insert edtech tool here] lady/ guy/ person” by focusing solely on providing PD and talking about specific tools. I know we all use commonly used tech tools and tips as an easy-in to a teacher we may not know very well yet, or even for someone who may be more reluctant to use technology in the first place. I’m not necessarily suggesting you don’t use that as a means to reach people early on, but I am suggesting that you avoid staying in that space. We HAVE to move beyond the single tool focus and into the transformative instruction space.
For example, instead of offering a PD session on “Google Forms,” maybe offer a session on “Student Mastery,” and highlight features in Google Form such as go to section based on answer to direct students to additional practice or a video if they answer incorrectly, the feedback features in a self-graded quiz, and so on.
Think of the end goal for the tool in the first place. Why do we recommend the tools we do? There is a purpose to them. Focus on that purpose, and teachers and admin will see you as an instructional guide rather than a tech tool salesperson. If you’re stuck, check out the Backward Edtech Flowchart I made to help you with some ideas.
And finally, beyond PD sessions coaches lead, we can really see deep, sustainable, transformational changes through coaching cycles. Take a look at the slide below that my teammate and tech coach Brooke Conklin made to showcase the focus each of her teachers had through coaching cycles with her. You can’t tell me that a single one of these isn’t focused on instruction. Isn’t focused on student learning. Isn’t focused on instructional design over tech.
This is the stuff that gives me the goosies in education! I downright tear up when I read some of these. This is work that really matters, and is making a positive difference directly for students.
Who can argue that schools shouldn’t provide a support position that is going to help teachers achieve all of these student-focused outcomes? The “tech coach” comes in by helping educators reach these goals through the use of technology (*when and if most appropriate). We happen to spend our free time researching and understanding all the different tools available, so that we can provide the best recommendations for teacher driven problems of practice. Our focus really is first and foremost on high quality instruction, and it always will be.
I’m sure there will be more to come from me on this topic. Whether or not it makes it to the blog because I’m drowning in work and school is TBD, but you can bet it will make its way into my daily work.
In the spirit of Brooke’s coaching cycles… how might we, as [tech coaches], reframe our titles and explanation of our role to more accurately capture the critical and meaningful work we do in schools?
Tech To You Later!
Katie