E-Coaching: An Overview

Adapting school‐based implementation support from in‐person to virtual: An experimental evaluation of a virtual coaching program to improve intervention fidelity

“…To evaluate a coaching program more comprehensively, social validity is an important aspect to consider in addition to the evaluation of intervention fidelity (Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010), as it sheds light on the acceptability (e.g., interventionists' satisfaction with the coaching they received) and usability (e.g., the extent to which a coaching process can be successfully implemented in a respective setting) of coaching. Previous studies looking into the social validity of virtual coaching have reported both perceived benefits and challenges, such as high satisfaction with coaching results (Geissler et al, 2014), time and location flexibility (Matsumura et al, 2019); but discomfort with the lack of in‐person contact before coaching (Ermeling et al, 2015). The survey results in the current study indicated that interventionists were generally satisfied with their relationship with their coach, and the coaching process, and considered coaching to be efficient and beneficial.…”

“…This virtual format could be more efficient than in-person settings where they might be disrupted by students or other people in the surroundings (Vernon-Feagans et al, 2015). Although virtual coaching does not allow in-person interaction, which might impact relationship building to a certain degree, this disadvantage could be compensated by the coach's respectful and positive feedback provided to the interventionist, as well as the enhanced concentration on the conversation between them (Geissler et al, 2014).…”

“…Despite the potential advantages of virtual coaching, the existing research literature is relatively limited in clarifying the specific characteristics and effects of virtual coaching. For example, virtual coaching is sometimes referred to as remote coaching (e.g., Powell & Diamond, 2013), online coaching (e.g., Matsumura et al, 2019), or e‐coaching (e.g., Geissler et al, 2014). This study uses the term virtual coaching and defines it as coaching services provided through web‐based online technologies (Israel et al, 2013) that involve distant observation and communication (e.g., videotape, video call, and emails; Israel et al, 2013; Kraft et al, 2018; Rosenberg et al, 2020).…”

Requirement Engineering for E-Coaching in Higher Education

“…Illustrated for a wider audience, this report deliberates students' and teachers' perceptions of the gradual shift of coaching practices towards digitalization and provides an evaluation of the societal influence of these progressions. The report speaks about electronic coaching systems in a comprehensive manner, encom- Warner describes electronic coaching systems as educational agents that offer questions to students and answers based on students' entries for choices [13]. The optimistic side of this description is that it seems too comprehensive and too tapered.…”

“…Ellis (1994) differentiated nine different methods of coaching, including humanist methods (focused on personal development), behavioral methods (focused on behavioral transformation), cognitive methods (focused on establishing adaptive contemplations), and goal-oriented methods. In the final approach, coaching is mainly concerned with supporting people to regulate and direct their interpersonal and intrapersonal resources to better achieve their targets [12] [13] [15].…”