Volume 12 Issue 2 (2023)

Exploring Within Team Differences in Coaching Supports

pp. 14-32  |  Published Online: May 2023  |  DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2023.122.2

Rosalie Hiuyan Chung


Background/purpose – Coaching supports teachers to varying degrees, and the same coach may engage different teachers in distinct ways. This study explores this variation in coaches’ interactions with different teachers over 2 years to identify supports for coaches to develop positive coaching dynamics with teachers.

Materials/methods – The study presents a comparative case study of two coaches who each oversaw two different teachers. Drawing on interviews with teachers and coaches over 2 years and videorecorded observations of coaching sessions, coach-teacher interactions were examined as well as individual’s perceptions to understand how and why coaches interact differentially with teachers.

Results – While the coaches did not differentiate their coaching process for teachers, they met teachers at different frequencies. Rather than determining their coaching frequency on teachers’ instructional skills, the coaches met more regularly with teachers who had stronger relationships with the coach.

Conclusion – The study illustrates that coaches’ dynamics with individual teachers vary, which can lead to some teachers being more receptive to the same coach than others. This study’s results underscore the need to support coaches in learning how to systematically differentiate their coaching based on individual teacher’s needs.

Keywords: coaching, coaching dosage, coaching perceptions, teacher differentiation


Attleberry, A., & Bryk, A. S. (2011). Analyzing teacher participation in literacy coaching activities. The Elementary School Journal, 112(2), 356-382. https://doi.org/10.1086/521238

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2012). Leverage leadership: A practical guide to building exceptional schools (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Bean, R. M., Draper, J. A., Hall, V., Vandermolen, J., & Zigmond, N. (2010). Coaches and coaching in reading first schools: A reality check. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1086/653471

Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A. S., & Dexter, E. R. (2010). Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 7-34. https://doi.org/10.1086/653468

Blazar, D., & Kraft, M. A. (2015). Exploring mechanisms of effective teacher coaching: A tale of two cohorts from a randomized experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(4), 542-566. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373715579487

Bondie, R. S., Dahnke, C., & Zusho, A. (2019). How does changing “one-size-fits-all” to differentiated instruction affect teaching? Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 336-362. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821130

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Campbell, P. F., & Malkus, N. N. (2011). The impact of elementary mathematics coaches on student achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 111(3), 430-454. https://doi.org/10.1086/657654

Coburn, C. E., & Woulfin, S. L. (2012). Reading coaches and the relationship between policy and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 5-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.008

Collet, V. S. (2012). The gradual increase of responsibility model: Coaching for teacher change. Literacy Research and Instruction, 51(1), 27-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2010.549548

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Denton, C. A., & Hasbrouck, J. (2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship to consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19(2), 150-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410802463296

Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional Coaching as High-Quality Professional Development. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1241947

Domina, T., Lewis, R., Agarwal, P., & Hanselman, P. (2015). Professional sense-makers: Instructional specialists in contemporary schooling. Educational Researcher, 44(6), 359-364. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15601644

Elish-Piper, L., & L’Allier, S. K. (2011). Examining the relationship between literacy coaching and student reading gains in grades K-3. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 83-106. https://doi.org/10.1086/660685

Gallucci, C., Van Lare, M. D., Yoon, I. H., & Boatright, B. (2010). Instructional coaching: Building theory about the role and organizational support for professional learning. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 919-963. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210371497

Glover, T. A. (2017). A data-driven coaching model used to promote students’ response to early reading intervention. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1260401

Glover, T. A., Reddy, L. A., & Crouse, K. (2023). Instructional coaching actions that predict teacher classroom practices and student achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 96, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.10.006

Gregory, A., Ruzek, E., Hafen, C. A., Mikami, A. Y., Allen, J. P., & Pianta, R. C. (2017). My teaching partner-secondary: A video-based coaching model. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 38-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1260402

Haneda, M., Sherman, B., Bose, F. N., & Teemant, A. (2019). Ways of interacting: What underlies instructional coaches’ discursive actions. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 78(1), 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 196-205. https://epublications.marquette.edu/edu_fac/18

Hopkins, M., Ozimek, D., & Sweet, T. M. (2017). Mathematics coaching and instructional reform: Individual and collective change. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 215-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.11.003

Huguet, A., Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2014). Building teachers’ data-use capacity: Insights from strong and developing coaches. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(52), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n55.2014

Hunt, C. S. (2016). Getting to the heart of the matter: Discursive negotiations of emotions within literacy coaching interactions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.09.004

Jones, S., & Rainville, K. N. (2014). Flowing toward understanding: Suffering, humility, and compassion in literacy coaching. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 30(3), 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2014.909270

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The Coaching of Teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 4-10. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/the-coaching-of-teaching

Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945-980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Corwin Press.

Knowles, M. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species (4th ed.). Gulf.

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. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318759268

Kuijpers, J. M., Houtveen, A. A. M., & Wubbels, T. (2010). An integrated professional development model for effective teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(8), 1687-1694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.021

Liao, Y. C., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., & Karlin, M. (2021). Coaching to support teacher technology integration in elementary classrooms: A multiple case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 104, Article 103384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103384

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research (6th ed.). Sage.

Matsumura, L. C., Sartoris, M., Bickel, D. D. P., & Garnier, H. E. (2009). Leadership for literacy coaching: The principal’s role in launching a new coaching program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(5), 655-693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X09347341

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.

Mraz, M., Algozzine, B., & Watson, P. (2008). Perceptions and expectations of roles and responsibilities of literacy coaching. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(3), 141-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070802059076

Obara, S. (2010). Mathematics coaching: A new kind of professional development. Teacher Development, 14(2), 241-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2010.494504

Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376-407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.

Piper, B., & Zuilkowski, S. S. (2015). Teacher coaching in Kenya: Examining instructional support in public and nonformal schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 173-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.001

Reddy, L. A., Dudek, C. M., & Lekwa, A. (2017). Classroom strategies coaching model: Integration of formative assessment and instructional coaching. Theory into Practice, 56, 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1241944

Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Beretvas, S. N., & Wong, V. (2017). Treatment fidelity in studies of educational intervention. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315734262

Robertson, D. A., Padesky, L. B., Ford-Connors, E., & Paratore, J. R. (2020). What does it mean to say coaching is relational? Journal of Literacy Research, 52(1), 55-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X19896632

Russell, J. L., Correnti, R., Stein, M. K., Thomas, A., Bill, V., & Speranzo, L. (2020). Mathematics coaching for conceptual understanding: Promising evidence regarding the Tennessee math coaching model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(3), 439-466. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373720940699

Showers, B., Joyce, B., & Bennett, B. (1987). Synthesis of research on staff development: A framework for future study and a state-of-the-art analysis. Educational Leadership, 45(3), 77-87. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/a-framework-for-future-study-and-a-state-of-the-art-analysis

Stover, K., Kissel, B., Haag, K., & Shoniker, R. (2011). Differentiated coaching: Fostering reflection with teachers. The Reading Teacher, 64(7), 498-509. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.64.7.3

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Vanderburg, M., & Stephens, D. (2010). The impact of literacy coaches: What teachers value and how teachers change. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 141-163. https://doi.org/10.1086/653473

Walpole, S., & Blamey, K. L. (2008). Elementary literacy coaches: The reality of dual roles. The Reading Teacher, 62(3), 222-231. https://doi.org/10.1598/rt.62.3.4

Weber-Mayrer, M. M., Piasta, S. B., Ottley, J. R., Justice, L. M., & O’Connell, A. A. (2018). Early childhood literacy coaching: An examination of coaching intensity and changes in educators’ literacy knowledge and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.013

Woulfin, S. L., & Jones, B. (2018). Rooted in relationships: An analysis of dimensions of social capital enabling instructional coaching. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 3(1), 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpcc-07-2017-0017

Zimmer, W. K., & Matthews, S. D. (2022). A virtual coaching model of professional development to increase teachers’ digital learning competencies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, Article 103544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103544



► Journal Metrics

  • 8% acceptance rate
  • 3.4 (2023) CiteScore (Scopus)
  • Q2 (2023) CiteScore Best Quartile
  • 0.42 (2023) Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

EDUPIJ Statistics from Scopus

CiteScore: 3.4, view Scopus page

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

► Educational Process: International Journal is member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

► New issue coming soon! (Volume 13 Issue 2, 2024)