Early Childhood Education Journal

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 175–186 | Cite as

Coaching Quality in Pre-kindergarten Classrooms: Perspectives from a Statewide Study

  • Ragan H. McLeodEmail author
  • Jessica K. Hardy
  • Jill F. Grifenhagen


Forty-nine coaches, 947 teachers, and 189 administrators in a state-wide prekindergarten program responded to survey questions about coaching dosage and activities. The survey responses were aligned with the Coaching Quality Framework, an organization of characteristics of quality coaching proposed by the authors, and analyzed to identify similarities and differences in stakeholders’ perspectives of coaching. The vast majority of coaches, teachers, and administrators surveyed agreed that coaching was an effective professional development strategy for supporting teachers’ use of evidence-based practices. Coaches and teachers responded similarly to questions of dosage and many of the coaching quality indicators. Coaches and teachers disagreed on some aspects of the coaching activities, particularly planning for coaching, that may affect the perceptions and effectiveness of coaching. Qualitative analyses of coach and teacher responses reveal programmatic planning components that support or impede coaching. These results have implications for how coaches, teachers, and administrators prepare for large-scale coaching.


Coaching Professional development Pre-kindergarten 


  1. Artman-Meeker, K., Fettig, A., Barton, E. E., Penney, A., & Zeng, S. (2015). Applying an evidence-based framework to the early childhood coaching literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Artman-Meeker, K. M., & Hemmeter, M. L. (2013). Effects of training and feedback on teachers’ use of classroom preventative practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 33, 112–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buysse, V., Rous, B., & Winton, P. (2008). What do we mean by professional development in the early childhood field? Chapel Hill, NC: National Professional Development Center on Inclusion.Google Scholar
  4. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2008). Experimental evaluation of the effects of a research-based preschool mathematics curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 443–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins, K. M., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. L. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(1), 67–100.Google Scholar
  6. Colorado Coaching Consortium. (2009). Coaching competencies for Colorado early childhood education. Retrieved from
  7. Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.Google Scholar
  8. Costa, A. L., & Garmston, R. J. (1994). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duchaine, E. L., Jolivette, K., & Fredrick, L. D. (2011). The effect of teacher coaching with performance feedback on behavior-specific praise in inclusion classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fixsen, D., Blase, K., Metz, A., & Van Dyke, M. (2013). Stateside implementation of evidence-based programs. Teaching Exceptional Children, 79, 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).Google Scholar
  13. Fox, L., Hemmeter, M. L., Snyder, P., Binder, D. P., & Clarke, S. (2011). Coaching early childhood special educators to implement a comprehensive model for promoting young children’s social competence. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 31, 178–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
  15. Glazer, E. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2006). The collaborative apprenticeship model: Situated professional development within school settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 179–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Greenwood, C. R., & Abbott, M. (2001). The research to practice gap in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 276–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grifenhagen, J. F., Barnes, E. M., Collins, M. F., & Dickinson, D. K. (2016). Talking the talk: Translating research to practice. Early Child Development and Care, 187, 509–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hemmeter, M. L., Hardy, J. K., Schnitz, A. G., Adams, J. M., & Kinder, K. A. (2015). Effects of training and coaching with performance feedback on teachers’ use of Pyramid Model practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35, 144–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hemmeter, M. L., Snyder, P. A., Fox, L., & Algina, J. (2016). Evaluating the implementation of the Pyramid Model for promoting social-emotional competence in early childhood classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 36, 133–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hindman, A. H., & Wasik, B. A. (2012). Unpacking an effective language and literacy coaching intervention in head start: Following teachers’ learning over two years of training. The Elementary School Journal, 113, 131–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jablon, J., Dombro, A. L., & Johnsen, S. (2016). Coaching with powerful interactions: A guide for partnering with early childhood teachers. Washington, DC: NAEYC.Google Scholar
  23. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. King, M. F., & Bruner, G. C. (2000). Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing. Psychology and Marketing, 17(2), 79–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kretlow, A. G., & Bartholomew, C. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33, 279–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kucharczyk, S., Shaw, E., Smith Myles, B., Sullivan, L., Szidon, K., & Tuchman-Ginsberg, L. (2012). Guidance and coaching on evidence-based practices for learners with autism spectrum disorders. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders.Google Scholar
  27. Lambert, R. G., Kim, D. H., Taylor, H., & McGee, J. (2010). Technical manual for the Teaching Strategies GOLD® assessment system. Charlotte, NC: Center for Educational Measurement and Evaluation.Google Scholar
  28. Matsumura, L. C., Garnier, H. E., Correnti, R., Junker, B., & Bickel, D. D. (2010). Investigating the effectiveness of a comprehensive literacy coaching program in schools with high teacher mobility. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 35–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. National Institute for Early Education Research. (2015). The state of preschool 2015: State preschool yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
  30. Neuman, S. B., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 532–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Neuman, S. B., & Wright, T. S. (2010). Promoting language and literacy development for early childhood educators: A mixed-methods study of coursework and coaching. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner, R. H., Thompson, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 71, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Payne, A. A., & Eckert, R. (2010). The relative importance of provider, program, school, and community predictors of the implementation quality of school-based prevention programs. Prevention Science, 11, 126–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom assessment scoring system™: Manual K-3. Baltimore: Paul H Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Powell, D. R., Diamond, K. E., Burchinal, M. R., & Koehler, M. J. (2010). Effects of an early literacy professional development intervention on head start teachers and children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rudd, L. C., Lambert, M. C., Satterwhite, M., & Smith, C. H. (2009). Professional development + coaching = enhanced teaching: Increasing usage of math mediated language in preschool classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rush, D. D., & Shelden, M. (2011). The early childhood coaching handbook. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
  38. Rush, D. D., Shelden, M. L., & Hanft, B. E. (2003). Coaching families and colleagues: A process for collaboration in natural settings. Infants & Young Children, 16(1), 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shanklin, N. L. (2006). What are the characteristics of effective literacy coaching? Denver, CO: Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse.Google Scholar
  40. Snyder, P., Hemmeter, M. L., Meeker, K. A., Kinder, K., Pasia, C., & McLaughlin, T. (2012). Characterizing key features of the early childhood professional development literature. Infants & Young Children, 25, 188–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Walpole, S., McKenna, M. C., Uribe-Zarain, X., & Lamitina, D. (2010). The relationship between coaching and instruction in the primary grades: Evidence from high-poverty schools. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 115–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wasik, B. A., & Hindman, A. H. (2011). Improving vocabulary and pre-literacy skills of at-risk preschoolers through teacher professional development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 455–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Webster-Stratton, C., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Newcomer, L. L. (2011). The incredible years teacher classroom management training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40, 509–529.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ragan H. McLeod
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jessica K. Hardy
    • 2
  • Jill F. Grifenhagen
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Special Education and Multiple AbilitiesUniversity of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Special EducationUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Teacher Education and Learning SciencesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations