Part 1:
The teachers that I spoke to at WPS were highly motivated educators actively seeking strategies that will increase student achievement. Many use various forms of technology in their classrooms on a regular basis, but most of them are unaware of the ISTE standards that govern best practices for technology integration. Despite the fact that board policy and investments in 1:1 devices have been made, technology professional learning has been limited to training on platforms and software. Research shows that improvements in student learning can be tied directly to teacher learning, so professional learning that incorporates best practices for integrating technology into instruction is an important step for the district (Gordon, 2022). An effective asynchronous professional learning course will need to introduce teachers to the ISTE standards and to the Triple E Framework. Teachers previously stated that they had no familiarity with but interest in knowing more about the ISTE standards. This interest in the standards would be a natural bridge to the framework, since the framework operationalizes the standards. Many teachers will also be interested in foundational research studies that show correlation between active technology use and student achievement. They may also be interested in research on inner cognitive processes that are somewhat automatic for many veteran teachers (Costa & Garmston, 2015). An effective professional learning course will also need to consider Kolb’s experiential learning cycle.
Part 2
Cognitive Coaching places an emphasis on planning and reflecting. The model is based on studies that show that the more a teacher rehearses their plan, the more likely it is that students will meet the objectives of the lesson (Costa & Garmston, 2015).
In cognitive coaching, a teacher may process the same teaching event as many as six times (Costa & Garmston, 2015). Any pianist will tell you that the more times she rehearses, the better she plays the piece. Similarly, teachers are more likely to achieve the goal when the teacher rehearses the plan. The reflecting portion of cognitive coaching is designed to provide space for the teacher to make meaning of the teaching event. The coach may facilitate this conversation, but the goal is for the teacher to “habituate the process of reflection” (Costa & Garmston, 2015, p. 199). The planning and reflecting aspects of Cognitive Coaching allow teachers to meet ISTE Teacher Leader Standard as they identify, explore, and evaluate technologies for use in their classrooms (ISTE, 2026). They also meet Teacher Collaborator standards as they collaborate and co-learn new technologies with students (ISTE, 2026). Teacher Designer standards are also met as teachers plan learning experiences that meet the needs of a wide variety of learners (ISTE, 2026). The reflecting emphasis in Cognitive Coaching also aligns with the Teacher Analyst standard as teachers use data collected by the coach to evaluate the lesson (ISTE, 2026).
The Professional Learning course will need to lean into this pattern of planning and reflecting and couple it with meaningful opportunities to collaborate with a coach on the teacher’s findings. This can be tied to Kolb’s experiential learning theory, which notes that learning is most effective when the learner moves through four different modes: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation (Gordon, 2022). Professional learning that can offer opportunities to move through these four modes “enables interaction between the learner and their social environment, fosters dialectical and critical thinking, and encourages mindfulness” (Gordon, 2022, p. 5). This also aligns well with the Interpersonal Skills section of the Tulsa TLE evaluation model which lists meaningful planning, reflection, and collaboration with colleagues as desired skills. In a practical sense, this will likely mean that a module leads the teacher through an asynchronous practice of planning a lesson that uses Triple E instructional strategies for incorporating technology. The teacher then will score the activity using the Triple E rubric. The next element of the course would then be a 1 on 1 coaching opportunity where the teacher discusses the rubric findings with a coach. During that meeting the coach leads the teacher through a planning conference where the teacher clarifies goals, anticipates approaches, and identifies success metrics (Costa & Garmston, 2015). After the lesson, another coaching opportunity will occur to encourage the teacher to reflect on the experience.
Part 3
ISTE Education Leader standard 3.3 focuses on creating an environment where teachers and students are empowered to use technology in innovative ways (ISTE, 2026). Cognitive Coaching is designed to do exactly that with the coach’s role as mediator, supporting the teacher in developing self-directedness (Costa & Garmston, 2015). Designing the course will allow me to meet Educational Coach standard 4.1, inspiring change in the way educators think about and use technology to support instructional goals (ISTE, 2026). Collaborative coaching also aligns well with Coach standard 4.3, as both focus on establishing trusting, respectful relationships between the teacher and coach (ISTE, 2026). Being a facilitator of peer learning also maps to Coach standard 4.5 with the goal of building teacher capacity to put the ISTE standards into practice (ISTE, 2026). Finally, the main goal for a coach in the Cognitive Coaching model is to be a collector of data that the teacher can then use to reflect on his or her own teaching processes (Costa & Garmston, 2015). This is directly linked to ISTE Coach standard 4.6 which encourages data-driven analysis (ISTE, 2026).
The ISTE Essential Conditions also offer affirming guidance for this work. Cognitive Coaching in conjunction with the Triple E Framework helps the school establish a shared vision for effective technology integration. A Professional Learning course coupled with ongoing coaching is a critical element of implementation planning, because it helps ensure that the district has prepared educators who are using research-based methods for integrating technology into their lessons with the goal of supporting student achievement.
References
Gordon, S. P. (2022). Integrating the experiential learning cycle with educational supervision. Journal of Educational Supervision, 5 (3). https://doi.org/10.31045/jes.5.3.1
Kolb, L. (2020). Triple E Framework. https://www.tripleeframework.com/
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2026). ISTE Standards for students. ISTE. https://iste.org/standards/students
Hello Robin,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post. I agree on building a powerful foundation for meaningful technology integration by combining ISTE Standards and Cognitive Coaching. When focusing on reflection, planning, and one-on-one coaching these steps help teachers with improving their practices, opportunities, and making the use of technology integration in their classroom have a purpose. I liked how you connected this to Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle, which helps teachers learn through reflection and action.
I like that your Cognitive Coaching isn’t just about helping teachers during a lesson; it also focuses on planning and reflection. I agree that teachers should take time to plan before the lesson and time after the lesson to see what worked and what didn’t, so they can make changes to the technology they use. I also liked how you tied Cognitive Coaching to the Triple E Framework because teachers can plan what technology they use, then look back and see whether it actually helped their students. This connects with my course because I want teachers to think about their learning goal first, then decide what technology tool or program can help them or their students succeed. I also like your idea of having teachers use the Triple E rubric and then meet with a coach to talk about the results. Do you think teachers would be comfortable with, or find helpful, a one-on-one coaching conversation after completing the Triple E activity?
ReplyDeleteI really connected with your point about teachers being motivated but unaware of the ISTE standards, that seems like such a common gap. I know until recently I was unaware myself. Framing the standards as a bridge into the Triple E Framework is a smart move, it gives teachers something concrete to bounce off of instead of introducing two new things at once!
ReplyDeleteRobin, the piano analogy for rehearsing a lesson plan is a good one, simple but it actually lands. Cognitive Coaching's doing a lot of work here, tying planning and reflecting into like five different ISTE standards is efficient.
ReplyDeleteThe six-times number stood out too, that's a lot of processing for one lesson, but it tracks if you think about how much better anything gets with repetition.
Solid breakdown, the Triple E and TLE tie-in pulls it all together well.