Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding and Measuring Coach–Teacher Alliance: A Glimpse Inside the ‘Black Box’

  • Published:
Prevention Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Coaching models are increasingly used in schools to enhance fidelity and effectiveness of evidence-based interventions; yet, little is known about the relationship between the coach and teacher (i.e., coach–teacher alliance), which may indirectly enhance teacher and student outcomes through improved implementation quality. There is also limited research on measures of coach–teacher alliance, further hindering the field from understanding the active components for successful coaching. The current study examined the factor structure and psychometric characteristics of a measure of coach–teacher alliance as reported by both teachers and coaches and explored the extent to which teachers and coaches reliably rate their alliance. Data come from a sample of 147 teachers who received implementation support from one of four coaches; both the teacher and the coach completed an alliance questionnaire. Separate confirmatory factor analyses for each informant revealed four factors (relationship, process, investment, and perceived benefits) as well as an additional coach-rated factor (perceived teacher barriers). A series of analyses, including cross-rater correlations, intraclass correlation coefficients, and Kuder-Richardson reliability estimates suggested that teachers and coaches provide reliable, though not redundant, information about the alliance. Implications for future research and the utilization of the parallel coach–teacher alliance measures to increase the effectiveness of coaching are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, S. J., & Hilsenroth, M. J. (2003). A review of therapist characteristics and techniques positively impacting the therapeutic alliance. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1–33. doi:10.1016/S0272-7358(02)00146-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, S. J., & Graden, J. L. (2002). Best practices in collaborative problem solving for intervention design. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 414–435). Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, K. D., Darney, D., Domitrovich, C. E., Keperling, J. P., & Ialongo, N. S. (2013). Supporting universal prevention programs: A two-phased coaching model. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 16, 213–228. doi:10.1007/s10567-013-0134-2

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordin, E. S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 16, 252–260. doi:10.1037/h0085885

  • Bottiani, J. H., Bradshaw, C. P., Rosenberg, M. S., Hershfeldt, P. A., Pell, K. L., & Debnam, K. J. (2012). Applying Double Check to response to intervention: Culturally responsive practices for learning disabilities. Insight on Learning Disabilities: Prevailing Theories to Validated Practices, 9, 93–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, C. P. & Rosenberg, M. S. (2016). Supporting schools in cultural proficiency and student engagement. Unpublished book.

  • Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K., & Poduska, J. M. (2009a). Measure of Coach and Teacher Alliance-Teacher Report. Unpublished Measure. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K., & Poduska, J. M. (2009b). Measure of Coach and Teacher Alliance-Coach Report. Unpublished Measure. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burbank, M. D., & Kauchak, D. (2003). An alternative model for professional development: Investigations into effective collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 499–514. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00048-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, R. J., & Sheridan, S. M. (2003). Investigating the acceptability of behavioral interventions in applied conjoint behavioral consultation: Moving from analog conditions to naturalistic settings. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 1–21. doi:10.1521/scpq.18.1.1.20877

  • Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000). Teachers’ responses to success for all: How beliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 775–799. doi:10.2307/1163489

  • Domitrovich, C. E., Bradshaw, C. P., Poduska, J. M., Hoagwood, K., Buckley, J. A., Olin, S., . . . Ialongo, N. S. (2008). Maximizing the implementation quality of evidence-based preventive interventions in schools: A conceptual framework. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 1, 6–28. doi: 10.1080/1754730x.2008.9715730

  • Domitrovich, C. E., Poduska, J. M., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008b). The Coach-Teacher Alliance Scale. Penn State University: Unpublished technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domitrovich, C. E., Poduska, J. M., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008c). The Teacher-Coach Alliance Scale. Penn State University: Unpublished technical report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domitrovich, C. E., Bradshaw, C. P., Greenberg, M. T., Embry, D., Poduska, J. M., & Ialongo, N. S. (2010). Integrated models of school-based prevention: Logic and theory. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 71–88. doi:10.1002/pits.20452.

  • Domitrovich, C. E., Pas, E. T., Bradshaw, C. P., Becker, K. D., Keperling, J. P., Embry, D. D., & Ialongo, N. (2015). Individual and school organizational factors that influence implementation of the PAX Good Behavior Game Intervention. Prevention Science. doi:10.1007/s11121-015-0557-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, T. L., & Hintze, J. M. (2000). Behavioral conceptions and applications of acceptability: Issues related to service delivery and research methodology. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 123–148. doi:10.1037/h0088782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, S. N. (1988). Acceptability of behavioral treatments: Review of variables that influence treatment selection. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 68–80. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.19.1.68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. L., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2014). School-based problem-solving consultation: Plotting a new course for evidence-based research and practice in consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (2nd ed., pp. 13–30). New York: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Burchinal, M., Field, S., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Downer, J. T., . . . Scott-Little, C. (2012). A course on effective teacher-child interactions: Effects on teacher beliefs, knowledge, and observed practice. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 88–123. doi: 10.3102/0002831211434596

  • Han, S. S., & Weiss, B. (2005). Sustainability of teacher implementation of school-based mental health programs. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 665–679. doi:10.1007/s10802-005-7646-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, V., Blattner, J., & Leipsic, S. (2001). Coaching versus therapy: A perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 229–237. doi:10.1037/1061-4087.53.4.229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hershfeldt, P. A., Sechrest, R., Pell, K., Rosenberg, M. S., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Double-Check: A process of cultural responsiveness applied to classroom behavior. Teaching Exceptional Children PLUS, 6, 2–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvath, A. O., & Greenberg, L. S. (1989). Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 223–233. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.36.2.223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horvath, A. O., & Symonds, B. D. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 139–149. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.38.2.139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, M. (1993). Burnout in teaching careers. European Education, 25, 47–69. doi:10.2753/eue1056-4934250347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuder, G. F., & Richardson, M. W. (1937). The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika, 2, 151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. J., Garske, J. P., & Davis, M. K. (2000). Relation of the therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 438–450. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.68.3.438

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mascendaro, P. M., Herman, K. C., & Webster-Stratton, C. (2012). Parent discrepancies in ratings of young children’s co-occurring internalizing symptoms. School Psychology Quarterly, 27, 134–143. doi:10.1037/a0029320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2014). Mplus User’s Guide (Vol. 7). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

  • Nadeem, E., Gleacher, A., & Beidas, R. S. (2013). Consultation as an implementation strategy for evidence-based practices across multiple contexts: Unpacking the black box. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 40, 439–450. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0502-8

  • Newman, D. S., Guiney, M. C., & Barrett, C. A. (2015). Language use in consultation: Can “we” help teachers and students? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67, 48–64. doi:10.1037/cpb0000028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pas, E. T., Bradshaw, C. P., & Cash, A. H. (2014). Coaching classroom-based preventive interventions. In M. D. Weist, N. A. Lever, C. P. Bradshaw, & J. S. Owens (Eds.), Handbook of School Mental Health: Research, Training, Practice, and Policy (2nd ed., pp. 255–267). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pas, E. T., Bradshaw, C. P., Becker, K. D., Domitrovich, C. E., Berg, J., Musci, R., & Ialongo, N. S. (2015). Identifying patterns of coaching to support the implementation of the Good Behavior Game: The role of teacher characteristics. School Mental Health, 7, 61–73. doi:10.1007/s12310-015-9145-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, T. J., Soffer, S. L., Mautone, J. A., Costigan, T. E., Jones, H. A., Clarke, A. T., & Marshall, S. A. (2009). An analysis of teacher investment in the context of a family–school intervention for children with ADHD. School Mental Health, 1, 107–117. doi:10.1007/s12310-009-9005-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Reinke, W. M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Merrell, K. (2008). The Classroom Check-up: A classwide teacher consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptive behavior. School Psychology Review, 37, 315–332.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Sprick, R. (2011). Motivational interviewing for effective classroom management: The classroom check-up. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., Stormont, M., Newcomer, L., & David, K. (2013). Illustrating the multiple facets and levels of fidelity of implementation to a teacher classroom management intervention. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 40, 494–506. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0496-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Renk, K., & Phares, V. (2004). Cross-informant ratings of social competence in children and adolescents. Clinical Psychology Review, 24, 239–254. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2004.01.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, C., & Beneicke, S. (2002). Coaching, mentoring and peer-networking: Challenges for the management of teacher professional development in schools. Journal of In-Service Education, 28, 297–310. doi:10.1080/13674580200200184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. J., & Church, R. J. (1998). Learning to teach: The acquisition and maintenance of teaching skills. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 5–35. doi:10.2307/41824208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. W., Romer, N., & Horner, R. H. (2011). Teacher well-being and the implementation of Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. doi:10.1177/1098300711413820

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Brock, M. B., & Elliott, S. N. (1987). Influence of treatment effectiveness information on the acceptability of classroom interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 25, 131–144. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(87)90022-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanless, S. B., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Abry, T., Larsen, R. A., & Patton, C. L. (2014). Engagement in training as a mechanism to understanding fidelity of implementation of the Responsive Classroom Approach. Prevention Science, 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s11121-014-0519-6

  • Wehby, J. H., Maggin, D. M., Moore Partin, T. C., & Robertson, R. (2012). The impact of working alliance, social validity, and teacher burnout on implementation fidelity of the Good Behavior Game. School Mental Health, 4, 22–33. doi:10.1007/s12310-011-9067-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, D., & Torrey, G. K. (2001). A comparison of two peer-referenced assessment techniques with parent and teacher ratings of social skills and problem behaviors. Behavioral Disorders, 26, 173–182. doi:10.2307/23888766

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Celene Domitrovich, Wendy Reinke, Keith Herman, and Jeanne Poduska for their consultation on the alliance measures used and tested in the Double Check Project. Support for this work comes from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (R324A110107; R305A150221, R305A130701), Spencer Foundation, and the National Institute of Mental Health (T32 MH019545-23).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA

    Stacy R. Johnson, Elise T. Pas & Catherine P. Bradshaw

  2. Department of Human Services, Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, 417 Emmet Street, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA

    Catherine P. Bradshaw

Authors
  1. Stacy R. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elise T. Pas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catherine P. Bradshaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stacy R. Johnson.

Ethics declarations

All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnson, S.R., Pas, E.T. & Bradshaw, C.P. Understanding and Measuring Coach–Teacher Alliance: A Glimpse Inside the ‘Black Box’. Prev Sci 17, 439–449 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0633-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0633-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation