Appendix A2: Findings from the SCOPE 2019 web-based surveys – NRCEC presentation of findings

The SCOPE study:
Understanding the prevalence, implementation,
combination, and tailoring of core features of coaching in
early care and education
Presentation for the NRCEC 2020 Virtual Event Series

December 2, 2020
Elizabeth Cavadel, Emily Moiduddin, Yange Xue, Liz Blesson, Natalie Larkin

Acknowledgments
⁄ This project is funded by the Office of Planning, Research
and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children
and Families (ACF).
⁄ Project officers are Wendy DeCourcey and Tracy Carter
Clopet.
⁄ SCOPE is being conducted by a partnership including
Mathematica, Child Trends, and the Children’s Learning
Institute at the UT Health Science Center.

2

SCOPE goals
⁄ Identify core features of coaching that are used as
professional development for improving practice in early
care and education preschool settings
⁄ Describe how coaching features vary across center-based
and family child care (FCC) settings
⁄ Describe the contextual factors and drivers that may
influence coaching implementation and features

3

High-level conceptual model
Supports for
coaching

Characteristics
of coaching
participants

Coaches
Implementation
drivers
Teachers

Coaching
implementation
Structural
features: factors
that shape the
coaching
process and
activities

Outputs
and
outcomes

Process
features: the
activities of
coaching

Contextual factors
4

Survey data collection: eligibility
⁄ Web-based surveys with coaches, center-based or FCC providers,
and center directors in 7 states from February to July 2019
- We aimed to recruit a group of connected respondents
- We required that respondent coaches and teachers/FCC providers had been
working together for at least four months or four visits

⁄ Settings had to serve low-income, preschool-age children
⁄ Coaching focused on improving classroom practice
⁄ Not a representative sample
- The coaching described by this sample may have a more defined structure
and/or intended process than a broader population.
5

Survey data collection: respondents
Respondents

Total

Head Start centers

Other centers

FCCs

Coaches

100

42

28

30

Teachers

130

80

50

-

FCC providers

38

-

-

38

Center directors

66

39

27

6

Survey topics
⁄ Coach and teacher/provider characteristics
⁄ Implementation drivers (training, supervision)
⁄ Structural features of coaching (content, dosage)

⁄ Process features of coaching (goal setting, observation,
reflection)
⁄ Center director involvement and support for coaching, and
center context

7

Today, we will discuss descriptive data
focused on:
1) Coaches, their caseload, and coaching dosage
2) The activities and features of coaching
3) Center context and support for coaching

8

Coaches, their caseload, and coaching dosage

9

SCOPE coaches: education and experience
Coach education

Head Start centers

Other centers

FCCs

97%

92%

77%

Years working with preschoolers

16 years

15 years

18 years

Years experience teaching and
training adults

8 years

7 years

10 years

Years as a coach to ECE
teachers/providers

4 years

4 years

7 years

BA or higher

Source:

SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey

Sample size:

100 coaches

10

SCOPE coaches: race and ethnicity
Coach race

Head Start centers

Other centers

FCCs

African American or
Black

7%

7%

17%

Asian

10%

4%

3%

Native Hawaiian, Other
Pacific Islander, or AIAN

7%

4%

3%

White

76%

85%

80%

17%

44%

20%

Coach ethnicity

Hispanic or Latino
Source:

SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey

Sample size:

100 coaches

11

SCOPE coaches: time spent coaching
⁄ Among coaches with a full-time job (> 35 hours/week; 95% of
coaches), there is variation in how much of their job is spent
coaching.
- About half of coaches (55%) say they spend the majority (>75%) of their job
coaching
- 19% spend between ½ and ¾ of their time coaching
- 26% spend less than half their time coaching

⁄ This breakdown was similar across setting type, with Head Start
coaches spending slightly less time coaching (38% of Head
start coaches spend less than half their time coaching)
12

SCOPE coaches: caseload
⁄ Lots of variation and many ways to measure caseload
⁄ 46% of coaches have mixed caseloads (work with centers
and FCCs)

⁄ Number of classrooms that coaches work with:
- Across settings, individual coaches work with an average of 4 FCC
classrooms (range 0-40) and 15 center-based classrooms (range 0-50)

⁄ Number of teachers/providers that coaches work with:
- Across settings, individual coaches work with an average of 16 lead
teachers (range 0-50) and 13 FCC providers (range 0-50)
13

Average number of classrooms in coach
caseload, by setting
20

19

18

15
10

10

9
5

5
1

0
Coaches in Head Start

Coaches in other centers

Center classrooms

Coaches in FCCs

FCC classrooms

Source:
SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey
Sample size: 100 coaches
14

Average number of staff in coach
caseload, by setting
25
21

20

20

18

15

13

12

10

10

10

5

4
1

0
Per coach in Head Start

Lead teachers

Per coach in other centers

Teacher assistants

Source:
SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey
Sample size: 100 coaches

Per coach in FCCs

FCC providers
15

SCOPE coaches, teachers, and providers: dosage
and communication
⁄ Majority of coaches meet with teachers/providers at least once
a month
- 40% of coaches in Head Start and 50% of coaches in other center-based
settings report meeting 2-3 times per month
- 47% of coaches in FCCs meet with their coach monthly; 33% report meeting
2-3 times per month

⁄ Average meeting is about an hour in center-based settings,
longer in FCC settings
⁄ Between meetings, email and drop-in visits are the most
common methods of communication
- 77% of teachers/providers say they communicate with coach between
meetings
16

Key takeaways about coach background,
caseload, and coaching dosage
⁄ Most coaches have a bachelor’s degree and multiple years
of experience with preschoolers and teaching/training
adults
⁄ There is variation in the time coaches spend on coaching
out of their total work hours
⁄ Caseload ranges widely and is challenging to measure

⁄ Coaches and teachers/providers meet at least monthly and
communicate regularly
17

The activities and features of coaching

18

SCOPE coaches: coaching approaches
Chart Title

21%

Relationship-based
coaching

46%
63%
86%

Practice-Based
Coaching

29%

33%
2%

MyTeachingPartner™

Head Start coaches

14%
13%
50%

Coaching tied to a
curriculum

36%
47%

Other center-based
coaches

7%

Locally designed

21%
37%

FCC coaches

12%

Entirely
individualized

25%
43%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Source: SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey
Sample: 100 Coaches
19

19

SCOPE coaches: coaching activities
⁄ Ways coaches commonly support teachers/providers during
coaching meetings:
- 92% often or almost always work on developing rapport/trust
- 64% often or almost always problem solve personal issues
- 53% often or almost always provide emotional support

⁄ Less frequent activities:
- 50% rarely or never help with preparing materials or lesson plans
- 39% rarely or never support stress reduction

⁄ Other activities coaches engage in during coaching meetings:
- 53% of coaches often or almost always work as an assistant in the classroom
- 43% of coaches often or almost always facilitate opportunities for other PD

20

SCOPE coaches: coaching features
Feature (frequency of use with a typical teacher or
provider)

Never/rarely

Sometimes

Often/almost
always

12%

9%

79%

Discuss how teacher/provider implemented the
observed practice

2%

13%

85%

Provide verbal feedback on strengths

0%

5%

95%

Provide verbal feedback on areas for growth

0%

11%

89%

Models/demonstrates skills with children

7%

15%

78%

Ask teacher/provider to video record their practice

51%

28%

21%

Ask teacher/provider to reflect on their practice

2%

18%

80%

Conduct observation of teacher/provider live or via
video
Feedback

Source:

SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Coach Survey

Sample size:

100 coaches

21

SCOPE coaches: goal setting
⁄ 65% of coaches report always setting formal goals
⁄ 84% of coaches say goals are jointly determined by coach and
teacher/provider
- Coaches report multiple ways of involving teachers/providers (e.g., discussing
strengths and challenges, breaking up a goal into small parts, discussing
career goals)

⁄ Examples of goal setting strategies used often or almost always
-

68% of coaches use classroom observation scores
62% use a goal setting framework
30% use child assessments
34% work with center directors to determine goal focus
22

SCOPE coaches: focus of goals
Focus

Percentage (%)

Behavior or classroom management

94%

Teacher/provider-child interactions

93%

Increasing scores on observation measures/environment
scales
Supporting child development/learning in a specific domain

74%

Meeting individual learning needs

61%

Using/implementing a curriculum (with fidelity)

56%

Other area of focus

4%

72%

23

SCOPE teachers and providers: coaching
strategies and activities
⁄ Teachers/providers generally report experiencing the same
strategies and activities that coaches report providing
- Teachers/providers report coaches assisting in classroom less
frequently than coaches reported (25% of teachers/providers say it
happens often or almost always, compared with 53% of coaches)
- Teachers/providers report coaches modeling less frequently than
coaches reported (56% of teachers/providers say it happens often or
almost always, compared with 78% of coaches)

⁄ Across their responses, teachers/providers report that coaches
are often or almost always supportive and encouraging
24

Key takeaways about coaching activities
and features
⁄ Coaches use multiple approaches and models
⁄ There are similarities in which process features coaches
use
- Coaches may use these features in different ways or at different times

⁄ Coaching activities are directed at a wide range of goals
and foci, even though we focused on coaching for
instructional practice
⁄ Teachers/providers generally report receiving what
coaches say they provide
25

Center context and support for coaching

26

SCOPE center directors: center context for
coaching
⁄ Number of teachers receiving coaching:
- Head Start center directors (n = 39):
o 89% lead teachers and 88% of assistant teachers receive coaching

- Other centers (n = 27):
o 81% of lead teachers and 74% of assistant teachers receive coaching

⁄ For most of these sampled centers, coaching is ongoing (no preset
end) and required for teachers
⁄ Many centers provide the coaches an introductory meeting or
informal training but fewer provide formal training
⁄ Directors report classroom observations, curriculum, and overall
program goals are key influences of coaching goals
27

SCOPE center directors: reasons teachers
receive coaching
Reason

Head Start centers

Other centers

Supporting teacher/classroom practice

95%

93%

Improving QRIS rating

33%

68%

Monitoring or licensing requirement

44%

30%

Concerns about performance

54%

19%

Requirement related to center/program funding

49%

19%

Source:

SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Center Director Survey

Sample size:

66 center directors

28

SCOPE center directors: coaching focus
Focus

Head Start centers

Other centers

Relationships

96%

89%

Teacher-child interactions

88%

83%

Child development and learning

75%

72%

Curriculum

75%

56%

Teaching content areas

50%

50%

Health, safety, nutrition

29%

44%

Family engagement

29%

50%

Culture, diversity, equity

33%

50%

Source:

SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Center Director Survey

Sample size:

66 center directors

29

Key takeaways about center context
⁄ The center directors in this study report that both lead and
assistant teachers are receiving coaching
⁄ Classroom observations, curriculum, and program goals
are influences on the goals for coaching
⁄ There are a range of reasons why teachers receive
coaching and variety in the coaching focus
- The focus of coaching is similar across Head Start and other types of
centers, with a few exceptions.

30

Challenges to coaching

31

Most frequent coach challenges
Coach challenges

Head Start
centers

Other centers

FCCs

Teacher turnover

83%

100%

-

Lack of teacher/provider classroom
management skills

88%

100%

87%

Teacher/provider resistance

95%

93%

90%

Lack of teacher release time

85%

89%

80%

Level of support from director

52%

89%

-

Teacher/provider personal crises,
stress, mental health issue

86%

85%

87%

Staff/coach ratio

74%

85%

-

Lack of coach time

93%

81%

73%

Source: SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 coach survey

Sample size: 100 coaches
32

Most frequent center director challenges
Center director challenges

Head Start centers

Other centers

Lack of teacher time

89%

50%

Availability of substitutes

86%

63%

Lack of coach time

84%

54%

Teacher openness

82%

62%

Source: SCOPE Winter/Spring 2019 Director Survey
Sample size: 66 center directors

33

Where are we going from here?
⁄ Future analyses to examine topics more deeply:
- Background of coaches and
teachers
- Caseloads
- Dosage and communication
- Goal setting and focus

- Coaching strategies
(emotion-based and
instrumental supports)
- Coaching activities
- Individualization

• New data collection to understand shifts in coaching and
professional development more broadly in the current time:
- 15-minute surveys with coaches, center directors, FCC providers
- 30-minute interviews
34

For further information about SCOPE
⁄ OPRE:
- Wendy DeCourcey: [email protected]
- Tracy Carter Clopet: [email protected]

⁄ Mathematica:
- Elizabeth Cavadel: [email protected]
- Emily Moiduddin: [email protected]

35

Additional slides

36

37

Exploring profiles of process features of
coaching
⁄ Are there profiles of process features of coaching?
- Considered process features related to observation, feedback, goals,
communication, approach to interaction
- Examined coach and teacher/FCC provider surveys

⁄ Did not find distinct profiles (combinations of process features)
- Process features were used in similar ways/with a similar frequency
- Exceptions
o In coach analysis: aspects of goal setting differed
o In teacher/FCC provider analysis: communication between coaching meetings
differed
38

SCOPE centers: internal and external
coaching
Number with internal
coaching

Number with external
coaching

44

22

Any Head start funding

38

1

No Head Start funding

6

21

Total centers
By funding type

Source:

SCOPE Winter 2019 Center Screening

Sample size:

66 center directors

39