Coherence, Challenge, and Critical Reflection: How Coaching Influences Learning and Change for Early Childhood Educators

Coaching is regarded as one of the most effective professional development strategies for achieving improvements in educators’ practice and fostering children’s learning outcomes, including in early childhood education and care (ECEC). However, what happens during coaching and how and why it “works” is not well understood. This research contributes to the body of evidence on how coaching influences learning and change for early childhood educators. Study 1 involved a meta-narrative literature review to identify which theories have been used to understand ongoing professional development in education, including coaching in ECEC. Study 2 entailed two case studies of coaching in ECEC in Australia, undertaken from a critical realist perspective. The findings of Study 1 illustrate that coaching in ECEC remains undertheorised, that theoretical consensus is lacking, and that further empirical testing of theories would be beneficial. From among the theories identified, four were selected to apply to Study 2 due to their potential to improve understanding of how coaching influences learning and change for educators: the interconnected model of professional growth (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002), Desimone’s (2009) core conceptual framework, self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), and transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1978, 2009). In Study 2, coaching led to changes in practice, knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs for educators in both case studies. Viewing the data through the four theoretical lenses illuminated what happened during the coaching and suggested which features and mechanisms of coaching influenced the learning and change that occurred. Coaching in this research entailed many of the practices and conditions commonly seen in coaching in ECEC, including those often considered important for its success. However, the coaching differed from common practice in several ways, such as by being provided by more senior colleagues rather than external “experts”. Most notably, the coaching did not have a focus on subject matter—a feature often considered key to effective coaching. Instead, the focus of coaching was tailored to each educator. The findings suggest that critical reflection is the key mechanism that drives learning and change in coaching, particularly critically reflecting on practice and its impact. The findings also indicate that flexibility in the focus of coaching can be valuable, so long as the focus is meaningful and relevant to educators and their contexts (“coherent”), yet is different enough from educators’ pre-existing beliefs, practices, or assumptions to trigger critical reflection (“challenging”). Finally, the findings suggest which processes and conditions of coaching are important to enable critical reflection. These include supportive service management that provides sufficient time for coaching, a coaching relationship in which the educator feels valued, “heard”, and supported, and the use of nondirective, active learning strategies that support an educator’s sense of autonomy, engagement, and motivation. By enhancing knowledge of how coaching influences learning and change for educators, this research indicates future directions for research. It also provides guidance for continued innovation in coaching practice, thereby supporting improvements in the quality of ECEC and better learning and development outcomes for children.