Session: Comprehensive Prevention in Schools: Coaching As a Means for Improving Implementation Quality and Outcomes (Society for Prevention Research 22nd Annual Meeting)

Although efficacy research has demonstrated the potential for preventive interventions to positively impact student outcomes (Durlak & DuPre, 2008; Wilson & Lipsey, 2007), the quality with which those programs are implemented in regular practice remains a concern. Tailored, data-driven coaching shows promise for enhancing teachers’ knowledge and skills through modeling, observation, and problem-solving (Denton & Hasbrouck, 2009; Pianta et al., 2008). In addition, the coaching relationship provides teachers the opportunity to reflect on and develop new skills, within the context of receiving on-going, performance-based feedback (Dunlap et al., 2000). However, there has been limited efficacy research of coaching models, and even less is known about the dosage and frequency of coaching necessary to achieve teacher behavior change and student outcomes. This panel will address these gaps by exploring (a) the patterns of coaching used to promote implementation of evidence-based practices in K-5 classrooms, (b) how coaches adapt their practices based on school and classroom needs, and (c) how teachers and students respond to coaching. The data presented in this panel come from three randomized controlled trials that test coaching interventions as a means for improving teacher implementation of evidence-based practices. The first paper uses a mixed methods to examine variability in coaching using the Responsive Classroom^® approach in order to determine whether the types of support coaches provided to teachers varies based on school-level implementation of a social emotional learning curriculum. The second presentation examines trajectories of coaching dosage over the course of a school year to determine how coaches tailored the time they spent with teachers as well as the types of activities engaged in based on their observations of  teacher implementation of the Good Behavior Game. The final paper focuses on the use of coaching within the Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management model and examines the relationship between coaches’ use of performance feedback and teacher implementation of proactive management practices; student disruptive and prosocial behaviors are also analyzed in classrooms where teachers did and did not receive tailored coaching on behavioral support plans. Taken together, these three papers illustrate the dynamic process between coaching supports and teacher needs; the potential for impacts on teacher practices and student outcomes; and the complexities involved in the adaptation of coaching interventions. The discussant will draw common themes across these three empirical studies and highlight implications for the large-scale dissemination of prevention practices in schools.