[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-602147-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-602147-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","secondary-level-literacy-coaches-and-content-area-teachers-relationships-as-an-avenue-for-school-improvement-journal-article","Secondary Level Literacy Coaches’ and Content-area Teachers’ Relationships as an Avenue for School Improvement - Journal Article","","A qualitative phenomenological study examined how secondary literacy coaches and secondary content-area teachers relate within one educational region in a northeastern U.S. state. Data were collected in two phases through interviews with five literacy coaches and nine teachers, capturing perceptions of the coaching experience. Results revealed three interconnected themes: coaching complexity at the secondary level, role ambiguity that complicates the coach–teacher relationship, and the need for job clarification that drives relationship building. Implications emphasize admin clarification and collaborative implementation.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/secondary-level-literacy-coaches-and-content-area-teachers-relationships-as-an-avenue-for-school-improvement-journal-article/602147/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/secondary-level-literacy-coaches-and-content-area-teachers-relationships-as-an-avenue-for-school-improvement-journal-article/602147.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"acoobca","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the study’s primary purpose?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The paper reports on a qualitative study examining relationships between secondary literacy coaches and secondary teachers in one educational region in a U.S. northeastern state.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was the data collected?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study used a phenomenological approach with two interview phases: five literacy coaches in Phase 1 and nine teachers in Phase II to understand their perceptions.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What themes emerged from the findings?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Findings identified three interconnected themes: secondary literacy coaching is more complex than in elementary settings, role ambiguity complicates the teacher–coach relationship, and lack of job clarification requires the coach to define their position through relationship building.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},602147,1792165580,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747870733,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Secondary Level Literacy Coaches’ and Content-area Teachers’Relationships as an Avenue for School Improvement  \nMary Cathryn Hannah Anderson  \nNorthwest Tri-County Intermediate Unit  \nTania Carlson Reis  \nGannon University  \nThe purpose of this paper is to report on a qualitative study that examined secondary level literacy coaches’ and secondary teachers’ relationships in one educational region of a U.S. northeast state. This study employed a phenomenological approach. Data was collected in two phases. In Phase 1, the researcher interviewed five literacy coaches about their role as a coach. In Phase II, the researcher interviewed nine teachers to understand their perceptions of the coaching experience. Findings from the study show three interconnected themes. First, literacy coaching in the secondary setting is notably more complex than the elementary school level. Second, role ambiguity complicates the teacher-coach relationship. Third, lack of job clarification requires the literacy coach to define their position through relationship building. Implications for school administrators concern the importance of clarification and collaboration with teachers and coaches in implementing a coaching model. This study contributes to the current lack of evidencebased research on the secondary teacher-literacy coach relationship and how school administrators can better support the literacy coaching model.  \nKeywords: Literacy coach, Secondary education, role ambiguity, coaching model  \nEducation Leadership Review, Volume 23, Number 1, Fall 2022 151  \nIn United States public high schools, 85% of students graduate in four years (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019) . According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), in 2019, only 34% of eighth grade students performed at or above the proficiency level in reading (2020) . These statistics indicate the need for school leaders to recognize the importance of literacy instruction at the secondary level. Specifically, students in high school must possess reading skills demanded by increasingly complex content area courses (Biancarosa et al., 2010; Joftus, 2002; Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003) . With limited teacher preparation, dwindling resources, and high-stakes testing, U.S. educational leaders are left with complicated questions within a complicated system.  \nHow do secondary educators assess and teach reading skills to high school students? Benjamin (2013) outlined the dilemma faced by teachers in the secondary setting where many content area teachers do not view themselves as reading teachers. High school teachers divulge that students have difficulty decoding and comprehending academic texts, but teachers do not know how to solve the problem (Schoenbach et al., 1999) . According to Schoenbach, Greenleaf, Cziko, and Hurwitz (1999), secondary teachers express feeling pressure to cover the curriculum and content of their discipline. Unprepared to give reading support, many secondary teachers find themselves teaching “around reading”(p. 4) . Secondary teachers are aware of students’inability to understand written information, yet there remains a lack of professional development to help teachers learn how to teach students high-level vocabulary and comprehension. Thus, content area teachers are often isolated in their efforts to deliver instruction effectively to below grade level readers (Benjamin, 2007; Schoenbach et al., 1999) . Literacy coaching emerged to fill an instructional gap.  \nThe focus of this paper is on secondary literacy coaches’ and secondary teachers’relationships, and how relationships inform the coaching construct at the secondary level. According to Fullan and Quin (2016), human capital within a school remains a key driver to organizational coherence, and creating a cohesive school with a collaborative culture is a requirement for school improvement. To improve schools, administrators need to understand the complexity of literacy coaching, and ","cbCaivEY8XNDnNLS","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaivEY8XNDnNLS","pdf",227547,18,"English","# Introduction\n## The Need for Secondary Literacy Instruction\n## Dilemmas in Secondary Reading Instruction\n## Purpose and Focus of the Paper\n# Literature Review\n## Literacy Coaching in Secondary Content Areas\n# Study Findings and Implications","[{\"question\":\"What was the study’s primary purpose?\",\"answer\":\"The paper reports on a qualitative study examining relationships between secondary literacy coaches and secondary teachers in one educational region in a U.S. northeastern state.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the data collected?\",\"answer\":\"The study used a phenomenological approach with two interview phases: five literacy coaches in Phase 1 and nine teachers in Phase II to understand their perceptions.\"},{\"question\":\"What themes emerged from the findings?\",\"answer\":\"Findings identified three interconnected themes: secondary literacy coaching is more complex than in elementary settings, role ambiguity complicates the teacher–coach relationship, and lack of job clarification requires the coach to define their position through relationship building.\"}]","Secondary Level Literacy Coaches’ and Content-area Teachers’ Relationships as an Avenue for School Improvement - Journal Article | PDF",1792094115,45]