Without a doubt, my colleague Michael Occhino has impacted my coaching the most. In our work together we have explored the theory and practice of coaching. Michael introduced me to the Content-focused Coaching framework, developed by Lucy West, which always begins with content, is autonomy-supportive, and is grounded in evidence of student learning. Michael continues to be a phone call away as a critical friend. I wish everyone could have a colleague who could provide a listening ear, solution-oriented practices, opportunities to be coached as well as to coach, and both praise and critique all in the service of being better. Michael embodies the University of Rochester’s motto, ‘Meliora,” which means “ever better.”

What do you enjoy most about your coaching work?

I love being in the classroom with a teacher as we undertake lessons that prioritize student ideas in learning science. Navigating teaching dilemmas as they arise is one of the most thrilling aspects of coaching. Being able to coach someone to find his or her own way to meet students’ needs while staying true to personal theories of learning is such a cool workspace. I also believe that my community of fellow coaches enriches my coaching work and am deeply indebted to my fellow Rochester-area coaches Pam Kissel, Lisa Chapman, Jeanne Van Voorst, Jeanne Carlivati, and Zenon Borys. Our meetings are work sessions where problems of practice are considered alongside delicious eats.

What was your most memorable moment with a student or students when you were teaching?

I think one of the most memorable moments was working with a group of students who were, by their own definition, kids who had no desire to do well in school. They weren’t motivated, they always had jokes to share, and their most desirable way to participate in biology class was to veer us off topic. It was a Friday, the day’s last period, and we were reviewing a test on which most students didn’t fare well. There was no motivation to work through questions most students had missed. I remember thinking how smart they were and how revisiting questions they had marked incorrectly was an opportunity. I stopped our work, got their attention, and explained that though the test was over, they could still change their brains, that their learning could continue. In fact, exploring and rethinking a problem they had missed was a rare opportunity to encounter the concepts and figure out where their thinking might need tweaking. And the bonus was that we could do it together, using each other’s ideas and perceptions to make sense of the science. There was a shift of energy through the room, and each student joined in our small group and whole class work. Over the next 40 minutes they began to uncover their own thinking and misunderstandings and moved their ideas towards more scientifically accurate ones. The students continued to respond to this reframing of test review from pointless and boring to owned and controlled by them for their own growth throughout the rest of the school year. Today, I have language to describe that moment: we were developing a growth mindset as both teacher and students, and utilizing student-centered, social-constructivist practices to enact that mindset.

What’s your favorite flavor of ice cream?

Mint chocolate chip.