The Dichotomy of Coaching in Education: certainty vs spontaneity

Over the past few weeks, I have been doing a lot of what I love best! Training educators to become either Neurolanguage Coaches or Neuroheart Educational Coaches. The essence of this training is about transforming teaching with elements from professional coaching as well as implementing cognitive neuroscience, emotional intelligence and neuropsychology into learning processes. I have been conducting this training for nearly ten years, but only in these last few weeks have I been deeply confronted with the most fascinating dichotomy. How can educators bring coaching into learning when in essence coaching is about letting go, not having an agenda and allowing the client to set out what they want to solve, achieve and do in each session? How can an educational coach strike the balance between the need for certainty, framework and path to follow and at the same time follow the learner, be spontaneous and demonstrate coaching presence – dancing in the moment?

I remember when I was a “baby coach” about 16 years ago, learning the art and skill of coaching conversations. Having been a teacher for so many years, there were so many things that I found extremely difficult. Some teachers’ habits that I found very hard to change were  asking multiple questions, repeating things unnecessarily, finishing off sentences, asking constant closed questions to name. One of the hardest things however was to understand that in essence coaching is about juggling between having a clear pathway and track to the conversation, while at the same time letting go and giving the coachee the space to self-explore and call the shots.  Professional coaches use models as “conversational rail tracks” such as the GROW  model, Sir John Whitmore,  CREATE, David Rock or FUEL, John Zenger, Kathleen Stinnett, all of which serve to help the coach have some guidelines as to where to take the conversation. The coach is always signposting, summarising, reformulating and  seamlessly bringing different parts of the conversation together, asking thought provoking questions and constantly placing the mirror in front of the coachee, reflecting back so as to stimulate insights and “aha” moments. The coach is not telling what to do or offering unsolicited advice, nor is the coach directive at any point. The perfect soundboard at all times!

And over these past weeks, the question kept cropping up  - how can teachers follow curriculum and learning objectives and at the same time incorporate coaching? Are we chasing the impossible when we talk about bringing coaching into teaching?

Absolutely not. I am adamant, that, actually, we do need to bring coaching into teaching. Not only for the learners but also for the teachers. About three years ago, I was giving a free workshop to some teachers in Bolivia. These teachers were amazing, but at the same time they were frustrated and tired. Amazing because they were in a school located in a less fortunate area of their city, with children from less privileged and troubled backgrounds and frustrated because they could not get the children to engage and also they blamed the parents for lack of help. We talked about the power of coaching and pushing into compassionate conversations, removing blame from any side and stimulating the children with open questions steering them to find solutions rather than focusing on issues and problems.  We explored how coaching can stimulate learner autonomy and also ownership of the learning process and how as a coach we can have that spontaneity to give them their power back and get them to realise they can control their situations. They definitely understood how they could change their patterns of communication to change the learner/educator dynamic.

So, how can we incorporate coaching into education? Firstly, educators can change from directive to non directive stimulating coaching conversations. Secondly, we can introduce coaching models to help troubleshoot learning blocks or emotional triggers. Thirdly we can incorporate the structure of coaching engagement, that is, goal and action setting. Even if there is a curriculum to follow, the question would be to break it down into smaller goals which learners are choosing as stepping stones to get to the final desired learning outcome.

And finally, yes, educators can have a clear framework in the background which provides the certainty to the process and thus bringing psychological safety, but at the same time, with professional coaching skills, can be spontaneous, letting go and empowering the learner to drive, whilst the coach is the GPS in the passenger seat.  

Neuroheart Educational coaches are skilled “maestros” at control vs flow. The beautiful dichotomy of coaching in education: certainty through concrete pathways combined with “the flow” of the moment, giving in to spontaneity.

For more information:

www.languagecoachingcertification.com

www.neurohearteducation.com

https://aelca.academy/

www.rachelpaling.com