A snapshot of Practice-Based Coaching across a state: Coach demographics and differences of implementation

• In Event: Coaching programs in ECE to improve effective teaching: Variations in implementation

Abstract

Introduction. Coaching, an ongoing job-embedded form of professional development, shows positive impacts on teaching practices and child outcomes in preschool (Kraft et al., 2018; Lipscomb et al., 2021). Practice-Based Coaching (PBC), an empirically-based coaching framework, is a cyclical process that supports the use of effective teaching practices. PBC is connected to Head Start Program Performance Standards, but varies in program characteristics (Harding et al., 2019). In one state, the “in development” coaching system encourages the use of PBC; yet more information is needed to inform the support needed for scalable implementation (Hamre et al., 2017). This paper includes a state-level description of who is coaching, and focuses on differences by program type (i.e., Head Start, non-Head Start centers, school-based, family/home-based) in PBC-related professional development experiences, and implementation habits of coaches, in order to identify ways to promote child outcomes at scale.

Method. In May 2022, a statewide survey was conducted of all licensed ECE providers; 2,166 providers completed the survey. Almost 17% (n = 360) indicated they had acted in the role of a coach or mentor in their program since March 2021. This subsample is diverse in their ethnicities, languages spoken, position type, years of experience in ECE, and program type (Table 1). This paper provides a descriptive analysis of coach characteristics and implementation habits (e.g., number of staff they coach, dedicated coaching time, professional development, PBC-related coaching activities). Initial descriptive analysis includes groups created by program type (Table 2). Follow-up analyses will examine differences in implementation habits between program type to identify disparities and support implementation.

Results. Initial results reveal descriptive differences in implementation habits by program type. Although there is wide variability, providers working in Head Start and community-based programs reported slightly more staff coached overall, and in one-to-one partnerships. The vast majority of respondents (71.7%) reported less than 25% of their working hours were dedicated to coaching, with family/home-based care being the least amount, and Head Start the most. Overall, just over half (51.1%) of respondents were coaching or mentoring their supervisees. Respondents working in Head Start (46.5%) and family/home-based child care (48.2%) were less likely to be formal supervisors of their coaches than the average.

Head Start coaches reported more professional development as a coach in all training topics, including PBC (63%). In regards to coaching activities, Head Start coaches reported they more frequently provided strength-based feedback to early educators, set goals and assessed progress toward goals, and reflected on the coachee’s teaching practice. Providers working in school-based program reported more frequent engagement in assessing early educator needs, and providing emotional support.

Implications. Practice-Based Coaching supports effective teaching practices that lead to positive developmental and learning outcomes in young children (Snyder et al., 2015). Findings from the present study offer a picture of what PBC looks like in different program types and can inform coaching activities and professional development of coaches as they work to support effective teaching practices to ultimately provide high-quality ECE to children.

Authors

• Hillary Ross Lewis, Oregon State University - Corvallis
  Presenting Author

• Bridget E Hatfield, Oregon State University - Corvallis

• Katherine C Pears, Oregon Social Learning Center

• Amara Bradetich, Oregon State University - Corvallis

• Isabella Sciuto Ozenbaugh, Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD)

• Michael Connor, Oregon Early Learning Division