A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of coaching and the contribution of coaching processes to learning outcomes for early childhood teachers and children

IF 3.2 1区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Early Childhood Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1016/j.ecresq.2025.02.014

Rachel E. Schachter , Lisa L. Knoche , Junrong Lu , Molly J. Goldberg , Paige D. Wernick , Shayne B. Piasta , Hope Sparks Lancaster

{"title":"A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of coaching and the contribution of coaching processes to learning outcomes for early childhood teachers and children","authors":"Rachel E. Schachter , Lisa L. Knoche , Junrong Lu , Molly J. Goldberg , Paige D. Wernick , Shayne B. Piasta , Hope Sparks Lancaster","doi":"10.1016/j.ecresq.2025.02.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Coaching in early childhood (EC) settings (birth-8 yrs) is a commonly used tool for supporting EC teachers. Yet, research regarding the effectiveness of coaching is mixed, and the “active ingredients” or coaching processes associated with change are understudied. In this study, we examined the effects of coaching on EC teachers’ practice, knowledge, and beliefs and child outcomes and the contributions of specific coaching processes, with respect to both overall and unique effects. We meta-analyzed data from 124 studies with 1042 effect sizes. Results indicated overall positive effects of coaching (i.e., compared to no or little professional learning) on teachers’ practice, knowledge, and beliefs as well as child outcomes. When considering unique effects (i.e., coaching compared to the same professional learning without coaching), there were no effects on practice but positive effects on child outcomes. Findings for coaching processes were limited, with the coaching process of modeling consistently increasing the effects of coaching for teacher practice and co-teaching decreasing the effects for teacher knowledge and practice. No coaching processes moderated effects on child outcomes. This study is an important step in understanding potential mechanisms within coaching that contribute to change in various teacher and child outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48348,"journal":{"name":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","volume":"72 ","pages":"Pages 156-169"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885200625000250","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Coaching in early childhood (EC) settings (birth-8 yrs) is a commonly used tool for supporting EC teachers. Yet, research regarding the effectiveness of coaching is mixed, and the “active ingredients” or coaching processes associated with change are understudied. In this study, we examined the effects of coaching on EC teachers’ practice, knowledge, and beliefs and child outcomes and the contributions of specific coaching processes, with respect to both overall and unique effects. We meta-analyzed data from 124 studies with 1042 effect sizes. Results indicated overall positive effects of coaching (i.e., compared to no or little professional learning) on teachers’ practice, knowledge, and beliefs as well as child outcomes. When considering unique effects (i.e., coaching compared to the same professional learning without coaching), there were no effects on practice but positive effects on child outcomes. Findings for coaching processes were limited, with the coaching process of modeling consistently increasing the effects of coaching for teacher practice and co-teaching decreasing the effects for teacher knowledge and practice. No coaching processes moderated effects on child outcomes. This study is an important step in understanding potential mechanisms within coaching that contribute to change in various teacher and child outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

对幼儿教师和儿童的辅导效果和辅导过程对学习成果的贡献的荟萃分析

幼儿（EC）环境（出生-8岁）的辅导是支持EC教师的常用工具。然而，关于教练有效性的研究参差不齐，与变化相关的“有效成分”或教练过程尚未得到充分研究。在本研究中，我们考察了指导对英语教师的实践、知识、信念和儿童结果的影响，以及具体指导过程的贡献，包括总体影响和独特影响。我们荟萃分析了124项研究的1042个效应量的数据。结果表明，总体上，教练（即，与没有或很少的专业学习相比）对教师的实践、知识和信念以及儿童的结果都有积极的影响。当考虑到独特的影响时(即，与没有指导的相同专业学习相比，辅导对实践没有影响，但对儿童的结果有积极影响。关于指导过程的研究结果有限，建模的指导过程不断增加指导对教师实践的影响，而共同教学则降低了对教师知识和实践的影响。没有指导过程调节对儿童结果的影响。这项研究是理解教练中有助于改变各种教师和儿童结果的潜在机制的重要一步。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Early Childhood Research Quarterly Multiple-

CiteScore

7.00

自引率

8.10%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： For over twenty years, Early Childhood Research Quarterly (ECRQ) has influenced the field of early childhood education and development through the publication of empirical research that meets the highest standards of scholarly and practical significance. ECRQ publishes predominantly empirical research (quantitative or qualitative methods) on issues of interest to early childhood development, theory, and educational practice (Birth through 8 years of age). The journal also occasionally publishes practitioner and/or policy perspectives, book reviews, and significant reviews of research. As an applied journal, we are interested in work that has social, policy, and educational relevance and implications and work that strengthens links between research and practice.