Supporting early career teachers’ self-regulation and goal pursuit through online coaching during a professional development programme

ABSTRACT

In this study, we investigated how early career teachers implemented individual goals set in a self-management training course in the context of professional development, followed by online coaching (OC) designed to support transfer to practice and self-regulation. We conducted qualitative analyses of coaches’ OC reports from 60 teachers and a case study including three teachers’ and their coaches’ perspective on the process of goal implementation. Two action-oriented patterns of goal pursuit (pragmatic and reflective) and one low focus and engagement pattern were identified. The OC helped teachers to deal with school-, stress-, and career-related challenges, and to reflect. We conclude that OC is suitable to support teachers’ self-regulation and to empower them, provided they engage with it. We argue that adaptive coaching models, based on principles of professional coaching, including goal orientation, should be further developed for teacher education.

KEYWORDS:

• Teachers’ self-regulation
• online coaching
• goal pursuit
• professional development

Introduction

Professional development programmes focusing on self-regulation and well-being have been established in many countries to retain early career teachers (Struyven and Vanthournout 2014; Whalen, Majocha, and van Nuland 2019). Teachers’ professional development needs to be related to their continuous learning and teaching practices. Coaching that includes a working relationship with an expert to help solve teaching- or career-related issues has been found to support teachers’ continuous professional learning (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, and Gardner 2017). However, little is known about how coaching works to help teachers implement new strategies for dealing with the challenges they face (Cheng et al. 2023; Kennedy 2016). The aim of the present study is to investigate how early career teachers implement personal goals with the help of professional coaches who work with them online following a self-management training course. The study contributes to research on teachers’ professional development programmes to promote teachers’ self-regulation, which is still scarce (Kennedy 2016; Vermunt and Endedijk 2011). Furthermore, it adds to the body of research on online coaching, which is limited (Hu and van Veen 2020; Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018).

Teachers’ professional development and self-regulation

Professional development refers to teachers’ informal and formal learning processes, related to thoughts, emotions and goals, which can lead to reflection and changes in their practice (Kelchtermans 2004). Current approaches emphasise the importance of dynamic conceptualisation (Liu and Phelps 2019; Opfer and Pedder 2011). Programmes for early career teachers usually focus on long-term commitment and teacher identity, as well as self-regulation, and often include coaching (Colognesi, Van Nieuwenhoven, and Beausaert 2020; Whalen, Majocha, and Van Nuland 2019).

Teachers’ self-regulation has been discussed from a health and learning perspective: It represents an important ability for adapting to given conditions and a resource for coping with stressful situations (Klusmann et al. 2008). The learning perspective is linked to self-regulation, which, according to Zimmerman’s model (2002), refers to the ability to plan and control one’s thoughts, emotions and actions to pursue self-set goals. The process is as follows: 1) Self-regulation activities before a specific task comprise goal orientation, goal setting, assessing one’s feelings of self-efficacy regarding goal pursuit, and planning how to achieve one’s goals. 2) Performing the task, goal pursuit and attainment are monitored by observing learning strategies and results. 3) After finishing the task, learners reflect on the outcome, evaluate the experience and draw conclusions for their further learning. Boekaerts' model (1997) illuminates the interplay between metacognitive motivational processes and the regulation of goals, domain-specific knowledge and cognitive strategies. Individuals develop their knowledge, skills and self-regulation strategies if they assess their resources positively. The following dimensions of self-regulation were found to be among the most significant predictors of job performance and well-being: the setting of goals, the efforts made to pursue them and persistence (Sitzmann and Ely 2011).

Vermunt and Endedijk (2011) found that teachers’ self-regulation ranges from (1) immediate performance-directed patterns that are focused on improvement in the classroom, (2) meaning-directed patterns which are characterised by the effort to understand underlying principles and to extend one’s theory of practice, to (3) undirected patterns that are related to problems with learning about teaching and innovation, including avoidance. The meaning-directed patterns are favourable because they are linked to deep learning. Teachers who showed these patterns were able to ask colleagues and trainers relevant questions on how to deal with challenging situations, whereas those who exhibited an undirected pattern had difficulties in implementing goals and target behaviour in the classroom (van den Bergh, Ros, and Beijaard 2015).

Goal pursuit

Self-regulation includes goal pursuit that comprises 1) the setting of goals and commitment to them, 2) goal striving and 3) monitoring of goal attainment. Self-regulation strategies based on implementation intentions have been shown to promote effective goal pursuit and behaviour change in many areas (Oettingen and Gollwitzer 2001). This approach enables individuals to activate an action process that involves anticipating (possible) obstacles and developing strategies to reach goals (Oettingen et al. 2015). Goal implementation can be supported by professional coaching which helps coachees to persist and stay focused through reflecting on the process (Brandstätter and Bernecker 2022; Brandstätter, Herrmann, and Schüler 2013).

Goal pursuit is a key element for self-regulation of early career teachers, who have a wide range of personal goals in relation to teaching practices, workload and career (Louws et al. 2017). Teachers’ goal pursuit has been linked to interest in teaching, self-efficacy, reflection and perceptions of help seeking as beneficial for solving job-related problems. Personal goals contribute to well-being and play a major role in teachers’ commitment to professional development (Butler 2007; Nitsche et al. 2013). Furthermore, it has been shown that teachers do not only focus on self-oriented goals, but also on student-oriented goals (Kuhn, Hagenauer, and Gröschner 2024).

(Online) coaching

In recent years, coaching has become more prominent in teacher education, and meta-studies have been conducted to better understand its effects (Jones, Woods, and Guillaume 2016; Kennedy 2016; Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018). The coaching relationship involves (1) the maintenance of a balance between emotional support and cognitive challenges (e.g. questions), (2) a contract, including goal setting/pursuit, as well as (3) co-regulation and co-creative problem-solving (Greif et al. 2022) during a development process. Coaching models vary according to their theoretical assumptions (e.g. constructivist, systemic), form (e.g. peer coaching), content- and instruction orientation. In contrast to professional approaches, teacher coaching is often content-related (e.g. lesson planning). Therefore, it has been described as being located on a continuum between ‘directive’ or ‘instructional’, which focuses on feedback to strengthen coachees’ instructional practices, and ‘collaborative’ or ‘reflexive’, to provide more space for teacher’s needs and goals (Kennedy 2016; Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018). Recently, teacher coaching models have been developed in line with international coaching standards (Greif et al. 2022) that incorporate adult education principles to empower teachers as self-managing learners (Kennedy 2016).

Online coaching, that combines technology-based communication and visualisations, is suitable for low-threshold interventions in the area of health and it has been linked to goal attainment and well-being (Atad and Grant 2021; Greif et al. 2022). Even though online coaching has been proposed to address teachers’ needs, it has not yet gained widespread acceptance (Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018). However, online coaching has proven beneficial in supporting beginning teachers’ coping strategies (Petko et al. 2015; Wopereis, Sloep, and Poortmann 2010). Video-based studies highlight that online coaching provides reflective opportunities to support teachers’ professional development (Barrett et al. 2024; Crawford et al. 2021; Powell and Bodur 2019; van der Linden, van der Meij, and McKenney 2022).

Quality aspects of coaching

Meta-studies show similar quality aspects for online and in-person face-to-face coaching from the clients’ and coaches’ perspective: 1) willingness to engage in goal-oriented learning, persistence, level of reflection and self-awareness, 2) interpersonal connection, co-creation, balance between instructional and collaborative aspects and 3) coaches’ expertise, credibility, interventions (e.g. resource activation, scaffolding through inquiry-based questions) and, specifically for online coaching, openness to technology-based learning (Hu and van Veen 2020; Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018). Quality aspects can be analysed from coachees’ and coaches’ perspectives or based on theoretical dimensions, such as goal orientation, trust, feedback intervention and psychological support (Jones, Woods, and Guillaume 2016). A strong goal orientation is a key element of (online) coaching quality and seems to be more relevant than the bonding aspect (Grant 2012). However, a poor relationship, for example, if coaching is not voluntary but suggested, can negatively affect the results (Grant 2012; Greif et al. 2022). In contrast, careful matching of coach to coachee can contribute to coaching success (Kwok et al. 2021). Hu and van Veen (2020, 291) found that different pathways of the coaching process ‘require different combinations and intensity of coaching culture and coaching pedagogy to be effective’. Coaching must therefore be adaptive according to teachers’ needs.

The present study

This study is the qualitative part of a larger research project (intervention study) based on an early career teachers’ self-management training (SMT) course, provided in the context of an established professional development (PD) programme. The overriding aim of the intervention study was to investigate the effect of the SMT and a subsequent individual online coaching (OC) on teachers’ self-regulation and well-being (see Berweger et al. submitted). Additionally, we conducted this qualitative sub-study to better understand the coaching process.

For the training, we referred to self-regulation as an active process and the ability to control one’s own cognition, motivation, emotion and behaviour in the pursuit of goals (Zimmerman 2002), as well as a central aspect of teacher well-being (Klusmann et al. 2008). We developed the SMT according to effective PD programmes from the German context that are general because they focus on self-regulation and well-being in a broader sense. Firstly, we drew on training courses to strengthen teachers’ self-regulation (e.g. Celebi, Krahé, and Spörer 2014; Schaarschmidt and Fischer 2013). Secondly, we relied on SMT programmes from the organisational context (Klein, König, and Kleinmann 2003). These studies indicate that pursuing personal goals is an effective means to promote training transfer and self-regulation in the long term. The training provides structured guidance on self-management, in which strategies for behavioural change and self-regulation are first taught and then concretised by means of the participants’ individual goals. The aim is to strengthen self-regulation competences and tools that can be applied in a self-directed manner to various challenges in the future. Therefore, the focus is on teachers’ individual goals rather than on content-focused, subject-specific goals (e.g. lesson planning). Clearly defined goals related to professional development (e.g. communication with parents, health-oriented coping strategies) are key aspects of self-regulation (van den Bergh, Ros, and Beijaard 2015).

Against the backdrop of Lipowsky’s (2014) ‘offer-use model’, we designed the training in combination with OC to support teachers’ motivation to goal implementation. Lipowsky’s model focuses on the transfer of learning to the workplace through professional feedback. We defined OC as a process- and goal-oriented, co-creative relationship (Greif et al. 2022). Goal-oriented coaching is rooted in motivational theories. The rationale for a self-directed approach is based on research showing the importance of self-concordant goals for self-regulation and well-being (Grant 2012). We included Oettingen’s approach of goal implementation that targets aspects of goal pursuit such as forming goal commitment and clear sub-goals, goal striving and forming if-then plans. It includes two self-regulation strategies: 1) Mental contrasting of a desired future (goal) (e.g. improving classroom management) strengthens the associative links between the goal and the obstacles of present reality as well as between the obstacles and the behaviour to overcome these obstacles. 2) Implementation intentions (if-then plans: ‘if I face situation X, then I will perform goal-directed behaviour Y’) facilitate goal attainment based on processes regarding the anticipated situation (Oettingen and Gollwitzer 2001; Oettingen et al. 2015).

The overarching quantitative study did reveal positive effects of SMT with OC on goal pursuit and changes in the interplay between self-regulation and well-being of teachers (Berweger et al. submitted; Keck Frei et al. 2020). OC seems to be a key aspect in supporting the transfer and goal pursuing. Therefore, the present sub-study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the online coaching and goal implementation process.

The research questions are as follows:

Research question 1:

How do teachers pursue their goals? Which patterns can be observed?

Research question 2:

How do teachers perceive and use online coaching to achieve their goals?

Materials and methods

Context

Our study is embedded in a three-week PD programme at the Zurich University of Teacher Education in Switzerland (Keck Frei et al. 2020) which is designed to support early career teachers during the induction phase. The programme includes content-focused courses, workshops and collaborative projects. The research project was designed to develop and evaluate a general SMT training within the existing PD-setting. The SMT comprises three modules (three half-days) (phase 1) and a subsequent five-month period of OC (phase 2). To test the effects of the SMT and OC on self-regulation and well-being in the larger study, participants in the PD programme (N = 273) were randomly assigned to three conditions: treatment group 1 (SMT), treatment group 2 (SMT + OC), and the control group (PD programme only). The SMT’s three modules are designed so that teachers analyse their work behaviour, apply methods to enhance self-regulation and implement the acquired knowledge through a specific professional goal (see Table 1). The participants chose a self-concordant goal based on their learning in the SMT. Goals were implemented according to Oettingen and Gollwitzer’s approach (2001) in module 3. The following analyses focus on the participants with coaching support (phase 2, N = 60).

Table 1. Self-management training modules, goals and exercises.

Module		Goal	Examples/Exercises
1)	Identifying strengths/weaknesses	Introduction to self-management/self-regulation Self-assessment of work-related behaviour/learning patterns Strengthen personal resources Applying solution-oriented coaching methods	Reflection on self-management (’sociometric line-up’) Test to assess work-related behaviour (Schaarschmidt and Fischer 2013) Method for systematic co-regulated problem solving (‘5 × 5 method’) …
2)	Dealing with challenges	Identifying behavioural patterns when dealing with challenges Practising solution-oriented methods and techniques	Focusing on the positive (‘three good things’) Strengthening efficacy (’active vs. reactive behaviour regulation’) Stress-reducing thinking patterns (‘analysing attribution and beliefs’)
3)	Implementing action plans	Analysing personal time use Formulating and optimising goals Activating personal resources Preparing goal implementation Creating an action plan; supporting personal commitment to implement it	Approaching change with time analysis/motivation Defining personal issues Formulating (sub-)goals Action plan Goal commitment (‘letter to yourself ‘)

For details see Bieri Buschor, Berweger, and Keck Frei (2022).

In the OC coachees and coaches worked with the professional coaching software cai-world (www.cai-world.com.; Berninger-Schaefer 2018). The coaches were trained to work with the SMT manual (Bieri Buschor, Berweger, and Keck Frei 2022) and with cai-world. They were instructed to move from an instructional (action plan) to a more co-creative setting which would focus on teachers’ goals and needs.

Participants

This study is based on a sub-sample of 60 teachers who participated in the SMT in January 2018 and in the OC from February to June 2018. Teachers were coached by 14 teacher educators with a coaching qualification. The sample comprises 57 women (95%) and three men working as primary school teachers (grades 1 to 6, ages 4 to 12) in state schools of the Canton of Zurich. The majority (62%) had three years of teaching experience, 17% had two years and 22% had four years. Their average age was 29 (SD = 5.72). As the intervention study required randomised allocation to the treatment groups, coaching was not voluntary. Of the initial 79 teachers who were to receive coaching, 60 participated. The reasons for dropping out of the study included termination or interruption of employment, time burden and low interest in coaching. Most teachers (68%) attended three sessions, which was in line with the study design (3 × 60-minutes or 180-minutes over 3–6 appointments), 7% attended four to five sessions, 13% two and 12% only one.

For the additional case study, we selected the coachees (teachers) from three coaches who had contributed significantly to the project. In addition, we considered the criteria of gender, age, previous work experience and the learning pattern regarding goal implementation (Table 2). Finally, we selected three teachers F, J and M, who were willing to reflect on their experiences after the OC. Two (F, J) are female (ages 24/28, 3–4 years of teaching). The male teacher M (age 52, 4 years of teaching) had worked in another profession before becoming a teacher. They worked in urban schools with a comparable (middle) socio-economic status in their classes (grades 4 to 6). Their coaches are female (48, 50 and 58 years old). They are experienced lecturers and coaches with a background in pedagogy or psychology and an additional Masters’ degree in coaching.

Table 2. Patterns of goal pursuit based on coaches’ reports over time.

	Pattern	Description	Example	N
1)	Pragmatic action-oriented pattern	Focus on pragmatic, attainable goals Strong action orientation, self-management skills, and openness to goal-oriented, autonomous learning Low need for feedback and deep reflection	Ex. 1: L set clear action goals (improve work organisation), acted autonomously. She implemented a new goal due to a current concern (improve classroom management). Ex. 2: N quickly achieved her goal (higher student participation in parent-teacher meetings), set other goals (analyse personal stress factors, change of teaching practice), pursued and achieved them by using rather ‘technical’ strategies.	20
2)	Reflective action-oriented pattern	Focus on professional development goals and self-regulation High interest in and/or need for coaching (e.g. school context, stress) and feedback Reflective stance, deep reflection High engagement, strong co-creation, high satisfaction with OC	Ex. 1: S actively pursued, partly attained her goal (improve self-management in teacher-parent cooperation) and recognised her success in a difficult situation. She set new goals (e.g. preparing difficult talk with parents), resumed, pursued and achieved them in a reflective process. Ex. 2: R actively pursued a complex goal (improve collaboration with peers, principal) narrowing it down to subgoals. She used the OC for reflective, co-creative problem-solving and was highly satisfied with it.	20
3)	Low focus and engagement pattern	Low focus on goal-orientation and goal pursuit (unfocused or far-reaching goal) Low engagement (e.g. lack of resources, resistance). Discrepancy between self-perception and perception by coaches (e.g. need for coaching)	Ex. 1: B set a goal with no focus (prepare the lessons well) and expressed a high need for support due to health issues. The goal was relevant to her, but she no longer pursued it. Ex. 2: W pointed out difficulties in creating an action plan, in clarifying her goal (optimise work process, deal with disorder, procrastination) and formulated wishes. She reported that she was making progress but concurrently showed resistance.	15

N = number of cases assigned to the pattern; 5 out of 60 cases were not assigned to the patterns due to lack of data or drop-out.

Data collection

The data sources we used were as follows: (1) coaches’ reports to document the OC process, (2) interviews with teachers and (3) interviews with their coaches.

1) Coaches wrote a report after each OC meeting for a total of 60 teachers regarding a) goal striving and pursuit, b) goals (type, revised/new goal, topic), c) the relationship/collaboration and the process in general. The reports of all OC meetings of a person correspond to one case (one teacher) in the analyses described below. 2) and 3): after completing the OC, we conducted semi-structured interviews (45 to 60 minutes) with three teachers and interviews with their coaches. The interviews included open-ended questions related to their OC experience, teachers’ self-regulation and goal implementation, as well as quality aspects related to OC.

Data analysis

For the analysis regarding the first research question, we followed Kluge’s (2000) approach of constructing categories and Vermunt and Donche’s (2017) conceptualisation of learning patterns focusing on the interplay between self-regulation and external regulation of learning processes. Patterns are the result of a reduction process in which an object area is categorised into groups based on one or more characteristics. The elements (combination of characteristics) within the pattern are similar. In the reduction process, patterns emerge that are different from each other (Kluge 2000). The procedure for this process was inductive and deductive.

We analysed the coaches’ reports per case by iteratively identifying meaningful elements and themes (e.g. persistence, goal achievement, defining sub-goals) individually in a group of two researchers. We then categorised the cases 1) based on these themes and 2) the goal implementation process (Table 3), including theory-based quality aspects, such as openness to goal-orientation and OC, reflection, collaboration etc. We worked as a team to validate the patterns. Firstly, we identified cross-case themes. Secondly, we made a preliminary comparison of the cases along these themes. Thirdly, we compared them in terms of differences and similarities. Fourthly, we grouped them by further comparison to reduce patterns. Boarder cases were regrouped in a cyclical process until consensus was reached.

Table 3. Phases of goal pursuit, description and examples based on interviews with coachees.

	Phases	Description	Example
1)	Pre-actional phase: goal setting and commitment	Coaching supports teachers’ awareness related to goal setting, action plan and goal-oriented stance; it serves as a reminder, helps to adapt goal(s) and to clarify connections.	‘I had set a goal in the SMT, but I forgot about it […] we had a look at it again and discussed how I could implement it’. (J, 5)
2)	Actional phase: goal pursuit and monitoring	Coaching supports persistence related to monitoring, adapting or further developing goal/action, references to implemented steps, volitional process to maintain and optimise progress; it activates learning and co-regulation.	‘I was able to implement the goal and […] I thought about what I could discuss with my coach. […] I always reflected on the process and then I could talk about it. That was cool, that it [coaching] accompanied me and reminded me again and again of my goal’. (F, 7)
3)	Post-actional phase: evaluation and reflection	Coaching promotes reflection on goal implementation, achievement, assessment of results of action, evaluation of success and conclusion regarding future goals/action.	‘This is like doing a reflection loop again and I have become aware of what is important to me. […] I found it very helpful to go back to teaching with this attitude’. (M, 29)

For the second research question, we conducted case-analyses based on the interviews with three teachers and their coaches. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, translated from Swiss German to German and analysed by an interpretation group of researchers. We identified and coded meaningful segments (Strauss and Corbin 1998) of the manuscripts individually and independently. After selecting segments based on the research questions we discussed, specified and revised the segments until consensus was reached. Then, the segments were coded. The coding frame was both grounded in the data and based on a priori defined aspects. This resulted in the following categories for the perception of coaching: 1) Persistence in the pursuit of goals, 2) identification of a current concern and 3) evaluation of the OC. Co-researchers refined the codes through a process of comparison and discussions on discrepancies to find consensus. We then used strategies following Stake’s (2005) approach to inductively and deductively analyse the cases. First, we conducted within-case analyses. Then we compared the teachers’ perceptions with the coaches’ perspective. Finally, we conducted cross-case analyses, including both perspectives. In addition, we analysed the cases deductively along the phases of goal pursuit (Zimmerman 2002) to understand how coaching supports each phase. We asked an external expert to evaluate the coding and the case analysis process in order to increase validity.

Results

Patterns of goal pursuit

The analysis of the coaching reports reveals that the teachers differed in the process of pursuing their goals and the use of the OC. While some teachers persistently pursued their goal, others had already achieved or abandoned it before the OC began. Certain teachers adjusted and developed their goals in cooperation with the coach. In some cases, however, teachers displayed limited interest. As a result of contrasting the cases over time, three patterns emerged, which are described in Table 2.

Teachers who showed a more (1) pragmatic action-oriented pattern, from their coaches’ perspective, were described as distinctively goal-oriented, autonomous learners with a high level of self-management skills and a pragmatic approach to ‘getting things done and goals achieved’. They set clear but pragmatic goals (e.g. ‘do more sport’), which they actively pursued, achieved and reported on during the coaching. The majority showed low interest in feedback but appreciated the structured approach of the action plan. Some teachers became more and more engaged and experienced deeper learning throughout the process. In contrast, those who revealed a (2) reflective action-oriented pattern seemed to have a reflective attitude from the beginning and an interest in PD through OC. Their focus was on self-regulated and goal-oriented learning related to professional challenges. They used the opportunity to reflect on teacher identity and PD (e.g. teaching practice, well-being, stress, personality and school context, career). They set high goals which they further differentiated, revised and/or resumed when they faced setbacks. The coaches documented that they connected different goals, topics and concerns with each other and tried to analyse the underlying deeper needs and developmental tasks. This cyclical process helped them to make progress in achieving goals and to cope with stressful situations, which led to satisfying collaboration. Teachers who showed a (3) low focus and engagement pattern were less goal-oriented than the other teachers. Even though they stated that they had actively pursued and achieved their goal(s), their behaviour revealed a low engagement level. Some showed difficulties in formulating clear goals. Others resisted and/or dropped out. The coaches reported that they had experienced a discrepancy between their perception and the teachers’ need for coaching. Some teachers, for example, suffered from poor health but concurrently emphasised that they had ‘no problems to solve’.

According to the coaches, the teachers differed in their openness to coaching and reflection on self-regulation. The goals set in the SMT were addressed in most coaching sessions and then differentiated or extended. Depending on the pattern, the coaches seemed to assume a different role in the goal achievement process: While teachers with a pragmatic action-oriented pattern were encouraged to reflect on the process, those with a reflexive pattern were supported in implementing their goals. Co-regulation was more intensive for teachers with a high level of reflection because more time was invested in achieving sub-goals. This was also the case for teachers with a low focus and engagement pattern. Moreover, the coaches found it difficult to establish and maintain a working relationship with these teachers. In the last two patterns, teachers’ stress level seemed to be an obstacle to pursuing the goal.

Case study: phases of goal pursuit from the coachees’ and coaches’ perspective

The case analyses supplement the findings above and trace the process of goal implementation. Table 3 provides an overview of the phases of goal implementation (Zimmerman 2002), which were considered for the analyses.

The following results illustrate three teachers’ perception of their goal pursuit, which is structured according to these three phases. It will be complemented by their coaches’ perspective below.

F, the action-oriented, structured coachee

The self-reports revealed that F was a pragmatic action-oriented, highly structured teacher (see Table 2). She described how she had successfully started her teaching career, perceived a relatively low stress level and attributed high self-management skills to herself. F stated that the action-oriented approach in the SMT/OC suited her perfectly. She needed the coaching initially as a ‘goal reminder’ (1, 2). The OC helped her to link her goal (‘have weekends off’) to personal and contextual aspects, in order to become aware of her underlying needs and to develop her goal accordingly. The coach’s support in the pre-actional phase and the co-creation during the goal pursuit (2) promoted deep learning. F used the OC in terms of co-regulated monitoring. She distinguished the emotional support, which strengthened her in a difficult situation with a pupil, from the goal-oriented part of the OC and emphasised that the action orientation was particularly beneficial for improving her practice and reinforcement of her teaching. While she actively pursued her goal, she remained rather passive regarding other (more emotional) concerns discussed with the coach. Finally, she highlighted how she appreciated the evaluation of her goal achievement (3), which supported her self-confidence.

The self-report corresponds with the coach’s perspective: the coach perceived F as an action-oriented, structured and independent teacher who implemented self-regulation strategies at a high level. F was willing to specify goals and to reflect on her role in improving a specific situation. The coach said that F was very satisfied with the OC because she had implemented her goals and changed her teaching practice. The coach felt that the added value in coaching for F was that she had always asked about obstacles during goal pursuit (e.g. ‘What prevents you from implementing … ?’). Their perceptions coincide in that F has learned to reflect on her goals and professional practice from different perspectives through OC.

J, the highly reflective, engaged Coachee

J’s self-reports showed that she was a highly motivated and reflective learner who was interested in PD: ‘I am always learning’ or ‘One can always work on something’ were typical statements, which recalls the second pattern (Table 2). The teaching profession was ‘her dream job’ and she had enjoyed teaching from the beginning. Nevertheless, she had reached her limits due to the high professional demands, difficult working conditions and her own self-expectations, which led to thoughts about leaving the profession. She was very interested in the topic of self-regulation and in the OC, which helped her to remember her original goal (‘to focus on the positive’) (1) and to pursue it during the process. In the context of an incident in class, she changed her goal with the help of her coach. J developed self-regulation strategies acquired in the SMT to cope with the situation and formulated the goal of sharing responsibility and distancing herself (2). She used the coaching for emotional support but also for co-creative problem solving and PD. She showed a high openness to cooperation and described, how she and her coach were able to connect her goals to different personal patterns and context factors. She appreciated the shared reflection throughout the OC (2, 3), which helped her to achieve her goals. She was satisfied that she had achieved a state of serenity in dealing with goals, but also with her own demands and she was no longer too self-critical when she did not achieve goals quickly.

In this case, the teacher’s self-reports also corresponded with the coach’s assessment of a highly reflective and engaged learner who was interested in the topic of self-regulation and PD. The coach experienced J as a coachee who immediately collaborated and delved into different topics (e.g. role, teacher identity and career, coping with high self-expectations) in a thought-provoking process. The coach described herself as highly engaged in the work alliance.

M, the meta-analytical, experienced coachee

In the interview, M, who had previous work and coaching experience, presented himself as highly reflective, which can be linked to the second pattern (Table 2). However, the reflection occurred mainly on the meta-level. He reported that he had already achieved his goal (‘decision to stay in the profession’) before the OC started. As an experienced coachee, he used the OC strategically in dealing with current stressful teaching situations and considered co-creation as a core element of problem-solving. In his narrative, he seemed somehow distant in relation to his goal and strongly focused on the high workload in the teaching profession, teachers’ role and identity, as well as on evaluative aspects regarding the OC (e.g. methods). Overall, he was very satisfied with his coach’s skills, the feedback loops and the results. It helped him to ‘look more objectively at what the problem was and how to solve it’. He emphasised that coaching was a ‘neutral place’, and a ‘tool’ that helped him to ‘go into the meta-level’ to analyse a situation in a reflection cycle (3). In his view, the coach helped him to reflect on his teaching challenges, to draw up an action plan (1) and to discuss his steps (2).

The coach reported that her coachee had been very interested in coaching in terms of a co-creative process to support PD. In her opinion, he had used the coaching to discuss current problems and reflect on professional challenges related to his personal situation. She mentioned that M was highly satisfied with the professional context of the OC. From the coach’s perspective, the added value of the coaching consisted in the fact that she specifically named successes as well as goals with M, and that together they formulated new goals in concrete terms and discussed how to implement them.

In all three cases, coaching helped them to persistently pursue their goals and to experience co-regulation. In addition, the coaching played a decisive role in helping them to precisely identify and clarify the goal or specific concern and to break it down into sub-steps. Finally, the coaching promoted conscious reflection on the goal process. However, they each used the coaching in a different way. F used it in an instructional way to apply the steps in the goal process and to remain persistent. J went through co-creative learning cycles that led to sustainable progress in goal pursuit and self-regulation. M, who had already achieved his goal when he started the OC and instead expressed a need for counselling, used the help of an expert ‘strategically’ for reflection.

Discussion

In this study we investigated how early career teachers implemented goals they had set in a self-management training (SMT) course with the help of online coaching (OC). The added value of our study lies in time and space-independent support for teachers in transferring goals they set themselves to strengthen self-regulation into practice. Offering support on a coaching continuum from instructional (action plan) to a more open, co-creative format that addresses current needs can be seen as an individualised professional development (PD) intervention (Opfer and Pedder 2011).

In the first part of the study, we examined how teachers pursued their goals with the help of OC based on their coaches’ reports. Following Vermunt and Donche’s approach of learning patterns (2017), we identified three patterns of goal pursuit, which differ in their focus, commitment, interest in self-regulation and openness to (online) coaching. These patterns are comparable to Vermunt and Endedijk’s (2011) learning patterns related to PD, as they also differentiate between teachers’ orientation towards action and reflection. OC seems to be an appropriate and flexible tool to empower early career teachers, provided they engage with it. Coaches adapted their approach based on the pattern, stage in the goal process (Zimmerman 2002), and teachers’ needs. Other studies emphasise that coaching pathways and phases require different combinations and intensity of coaching methods to be effective (i.e. shift between and stress different phases; Hu and van Veen 2020). For teachers who were assigned to the pragmatic action-oriented pattern, coaches encouraged reflection throughout the process and challenged them to pursue goals related to their own learning. Reflection strengthened by coaching has been identified as a key aspect in supporting goal attainment (Brandstätter, Herrmann, and Schüler 2013). The coach seemed to play a stronger co-regulatory role for teachers assigned to the reflective action-oriented pattern, which included support in refining the action plan, recognising obstacles, activating resources, and maintaining focus and goal orientation. For teachers assigned to the low focus and engagement pattern, coaching was more directed to defining a learning goal, taking steps to implement it, and supporting persistence. Regardless of the pattern, a strong focus on goal orientation and a good matching between coach and coachee might be crucial for engagement in coaching, as suggested by Kwok et al. (2021).

From the coaches’ perspective, some teachers displayed resistance to coaching in general, possibly because they perceived it as psychological counselling, associated with therapeutic aspects. As a result, they may have experienced it as threat to their identity or autonomy, rather than as a method to empower them as self-managing learners, as described by Kennedy (2016). Others faced high levels of stress in their everyday life so that they might not have had any resources for the OC, which corresponds with self-regulation models: individuals develop their self-regulation when they perceive their resources to be sufficient (Boekaerts 1997). It can also be assumed that some teachers found the goal process irrelevant or unreasonable. This could also be related to the research design (intervention study), due to which teachers did not voluntarily participate in the coaching, which can be a barrier in the process (Greif et al. 2022). On the other hand, the non-voluntary coachees can be seen as an advantage for the study: The results are not only based on motivated participants, but also include those who expressed no need for online-support while implementing their goals. Although the online format was appreciated by most as low-threshold support, it may have been seen as less binding by a few as described by Greif et al. (2022).

In the second part of the study, we examined how both teachers and coaches experienced the goal achievement process and how they used the OC. Teachers’ satisfaction with goal achievement and changes linked to the coaching in the case analyses can be interpreted as sign, that OC is a suitable intervention to support persistence. Previous research shows that goal orientation, supported by coaching, is related to persistence, well-being and behavioural change (Brandstätter and Bernecker 2022; Brandstätter, Herrmann, and Schüler 2013; Oettingen et al. 2015). Studies on teachers’ goal orientation have also revealed that teachers who consciously pursued goals were more reflective and perceived help-seeking as an important contribution to problem-solving, which positively shaped their teacher identity (Butler 2007; Nitsche et al. 2013). The case study illustrates, that teachers with a pragmatic action-oriented pattern could have appreciated the goal-oriented OC because it seemed to match their high need for structure and improvement of work organisation. The findings suggest that the goal-oriented OC was also beneficial for teachers with a reflective action-oriented pattern. On the one hand, the structured and analytical approach might have helped to break down complex situations and challenges into concrete goals and action steps within their sphere of influence. On the other hand, the more open part of the coaching also addressed the need for emotional support, which, as described in one case, led to more serenity in dealing with the coachees’ self-expectations and goals. The case study further illustrates that one teacher, who was mainly action-oriented at the beginning, also developed a reflective stance during the OC with the help of reflective questions.

Coaches seem to play a crucial role during all phases of goal pursuit, be it in the identification of goals and action steps, in analysing the process by asking questions, addressing obstacles and promoting awareness of connections between goals, needs and problems, or in guided reflection during all phases (Oettingen and Gollwitzer 2001). We further suppose that a fine balance between goal-orientation, challenges (questions etc.) and emotional support are essential for the success of coaching. These assumptions are substantiated by studies related to quality aspects of coaching (Grant 2014; Jones, Woods, and Guillaume 2016).

Conclusion

Overall, we see our study as promising starting point for further research and development of teacher training and PD programmes in the field of continuous education to strengthen teachers’ self-regulation and goal implementation through online coaching. Goal orientation, which is linked to job satisfaction and well-being (Sitzmann and Ely 2011), is particularly important in the early career phase in order to remain self-regulated and healthy at work (Struyven and Vanthournout 2014). Goal-oriented online coaching can be a valuable low-threshold way of supporting in-service but also pre-service teachers.

Our study emphasises the importance of the further development of teacher coaching models on the continuum between instructional and co-creative, open forms, including professional goal-oriented coaching approaches (Greif et al. 2022). Coaches need to develop adaptive coaching systems to address teachers’ needs and to enable learning related to different patterns of goal pursuit. We assume that the patterns described can be shaped by such coaching. For teachers with a reflective pattern, this could mean encouraging them to set themselves specific (sub-)goals and to engage in action quickly. For teachers who are highly action-oriented, coaching could be focused on their own learning and reflection. For teachers with a low engagement pattern, a coach could support them in setting and formulating realistic goals in the first place and not remaining at the level of wishes. We consider Oettingen and Gollwitzer’s goal-orientation approach (2001) to be generally of great value for both in-service and pre-service teacher training. In particular, action plans, including anticipating obstacles by ‘mental contrasting’ are an effective tool for building the bridge from motivation to action and the realisation of goals (Oettingen et al. 2015).

However, the present study is based on qualitative data. Therefore, caution is required when generalising the results. It would be interesting to examine the goal-oriented coaching process in a longitudinal interview study. We suggest that SMT and (online) coaching be established during teacher training so that pre-service teachers formulate goals with regard to their self-regulation and well-being. Adaptive coaching that provides more space for teachers’ needs and self-regulation (Kennedy 2016), including peer coaching, can be practised early on in the internships and during examination phases, where student teachers experience many challenges and high levels of stress (Atad and Grant 2021). We assume that the experience of a successfully implemented goal attainment process can strengthen teachers’ goal-orientation for their own learning and empower them as self-regulated learners. Familiarising beginning and experienced teachers with coaching could increase their motivation to seek support when under high stress. They may also recognise coaching as a ‘method’ that encourages them to act in a solution- and action-oriented way even in complex situations with students, parents or in the school team. In addition, gaining knowledge in the field of coaching is important in view of the changing teaching settings towards individualisation and a focus on self-regulated learning in the classroom.

Along these lines, we suggest that future research further explores coaching pathways, including patterns of goal pursuit from both teachers’ and coaches’ perspectives and adaptive coaching models for teacher education.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation under Grant [no. 100019_175878], ethic approval was not necessary.

Notes on contributors

Zippora Bührer

Zippora Bührer (MA) is a PhD-student and research assistant at the Faculty of Secondary I Education at Zurich University of Teacher Education. Her research areas are professional development, self-regulation and coaching.

Christine Bieri Buschor

Christine Bieri Buschor (Prof. Dr.) is the Head of the Faculty of Secondary I Education at Zurich University of Teacher Education. Her main areas of research are teacher education, professional development, career choices, leadership and coaching.

Simone Berweger

Simone Berweger (Dr. phil.) is a Senior lecturer of psychology and member of the management team for aptitude assessment at Zurich University of Teacher Education. Her research focuses on career psychology, professionalisation and self-regulation.

Andrea Keck Frei

Andrea Keck Frei (MA) is a Head of Studies at the Faculty of Secondary I Education at Zurich University of Teacher Education. Her interests focus on choice of studies, professional development and self-regulation in the teaching profession.

Christine Wolfgramm

Christine Wolfgramm (Dr. phil.) is a Professor of Educational Psychology at the Faculty of Secondary I Education at Zurich University of Teacher Education. Her research expertise is in professional development, stress, teacher self-regulation, as well as cultural identity and acculturation.