Literacy Coaching: Navigating A Transitioning Literacy Terrain


  • Melanie Renee Loewenstein Texas A&M University-Commerce


literacy , literacy coach, reading specialist


The terrain of Literacy education has undergone significant shifts since the enactment of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in 2001. Drawing on personal experiences and observations, the author examines how literacy coaching has evolved from its formative years post-NCLB to the present day in the wake of recent legislative actions surrounding House Bill 3 (HB 3). This manuscript reviews the timeless roles and responsibilities of Literacy Coaches in these changing times and addresses areas or distinct aspects of this evolving literacy landscape, highlighting strategies needed to support classroom teachers and promote student literacy achievement.

Additionally, this manuscript discusses the role of Literacy Coaches as they help teachers make sense of and implement evidence-based literacy practices associated with the Science of Teaching Reading (STR) or Science of Reading (SOR). It delves into technological advancements like AI, and its impact on student literacy development, proposing recommendations for Literacy Coaches and classroom teachers.  Finally, it describes the importance of culturally informing literacy instruction in diverse classrooms, urging literacy coaches to support teachers in considering students' cultural and linguistic backgrounds in order to foster more equitable learning experiences. 


BillTrack*50*.(n.d.). TX HB2162. Retrieved from

Burkins, J., & Yates, Y. (2021). Shifting the balance: 6 ways to bring the science of reading into the balanced literacy classroom. Stenhouse.

Cawelti, G. (2006). The side effects of NCLB. Educational Leadership, 64(3), 64-68. Retrieved from

Chiu, T. K. F., Moorhouse, B. L., Chai, C. S., & Ismailov, M. (2023). Teacher support and student motivation to learn with artificial intelligence (AI) based chatbot. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-17. doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2172044

Ciampa, K., Jagielo-Manion, R., Gormley, A., Quinn, G., & Fanelle, S. (2023). Literacy coaching roles ReImagined during the COVID-19 pandemic. Elementary School Journal, 124(2), 297-321. doi:10.1086/727217

Echols, S. M. (2023). Did a bot do your work? teaching AI literacy skills. Computers in Libraries, 43(10), 28-32. Retrieved from

Hammond, Z. L. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students (1st ed.). Corwin Press.

International Literacy Association. (2018). Standards for the preparation of literacy professionals 2018. International Literacy Association

Kelly, L. B., & Djonko‐Moore, C. (2022). What does culturally informed literacy instruction look like? Reading Teacher, 75(5), 567-574. doi:10.1002/trtr.2068

Kelly, L. B., Wakefield, W., Caires-Hurley, J., Kganetso, L. W., Moses, L., & Baca, E. (2021). What is culturally informed literacy instruction? A review of research in P–5 contexts. Journal of Literacy Research, 53(1), 75-99. doi:10.1177/1086296X20986602

Kim, J., & Lee, S. (2023). Are two heads better than one?: The effect of student-AI collaboration on students' learning task performance. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 67(2), 365-375. doi:10.1007/s11528-022-00788-9

Kissel, B., Mraz, M., Algozzine, B., & Stover, K. (2011). Early childhood literacy coaches' role perceptions and recommendations for change. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(3), 288-303. doi:10.1080/02568543.2011.580207

Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547-588. doi:10.3102/0034654318759268

Leopold, T. A., Ratcheve, V., & Zahidi, S. (2018). The future of jobs report 2018. Retrieved from chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000). Report of the national reading panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.

Paige, D. D., Young, C., Rasinski, T. V., Rupley, W. H., Nichols, W. D., & Valerio, M. (2021). Teaching reading is more than a science: It's also an art. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), S339-S350. doi:10.1002/rrq.388

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85-100. doi:10.17763/haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77

Parsons, S. A., & Erickson, J. D. (2024). Where is motivation in the science of reading? Phi Delta Kappan, 105(5), 32-36. doi:10.1177/00317217241230782

Parsons, S. A., & Harrington, A. D. (2009). Following the script. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(10), 748-750. doi:10.1177/003172170909001014

Riley, B. (2020). Drawing on reading science without starting a war. Educational Leadership, 77(5), 16-22. Retrieved from

Rush, L. S., & Scherff, L. (2012). NCLB 10 years later. English Education, 44(2), 91-101. doi:10.58680/ee201218435

Schmelzer, R. (2019). AI applications in education. Retrieved from

Shaw, M. L. (2009). Teaching and empowering reading specialists to be literacy coaches: Vision, passion, communication and collaboration. New England Reading Association Journal, 45(1), 7-18. Retrieved from

Shearer, B., Carr, D., & Vogt, M. (2019). Reading specialists and literacy coaches in the real world (4th ed.).Waveland Press, Inc.

Texas Education Agency. ( n.d.). HB Reading Academies. Retrieved from

Vygotsky, Lev. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.



Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 > >>