Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Educ.
Sec. Special Educational Needs
Volume 9 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1324118

Development, Field Testing, and Initial Validation of an Adherence Rubric for Caregiver Coaching

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
  • 2 Rush University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 3 Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Professions, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    The translation and use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within early intervention (EI) systems presents challenges. The Office of Special Education (OSEP) has emphasized results-driven accountability to expand state accountability from compliance to also include quality services that align with EBPs. OSEP’s results-driven accountability provided states the opportunity to design State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIP) to strengthen the quality of EI services by increasing the capacity of EI systems to implement, scale-up, and sustain use of EBPs. Caregiver coaching is widely accepted as an EBP within EI settings, yet uptake and fidelity to coaching practices remains limited. Such widespread implementation of caregiver coaching is partially limited by a lack of measurement tools that operationalize behaviors consistent with coaching. In this study, we describe the development of the Kentucky Coaching Adherence Rubric-Revised (KCAR-R) using Dawson’s (2017) 14 design elements for rubrics and psychometric testing of the instrument. We developed and tested the KCAR-R to measure fidelity of coaching practices within a state-wide professional development program, the Coaching in Early Intervention Training and Mentorship Program. We define operational elements of the KCAR-R and rubric design elements related to: creators; users and uses; specificity, judgment complexity; evaluative criteria; quality levels; quality definitions; scoring strategies; presentation; explanation; quality processes; accompanying feedback information; secrecy; and exemplars. With regard to psychometric validation of the KCAR-R, interrater reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients across 8 raters and 301 randomly selected video submissions. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha across 429 video submissions. Results showed .987 agreement, indicating excellent interrater reliability; item level internal consistency values ranged from .860 to .882 for scale if item deleted and .834 for the total scale. Findings from this study showed that the KCAR-R operationalized behaviors that exemplify caregiver coaching and may serve as a resource for other states or programs to document the quality and fidelity of evidence-based EI services. To influence EI provider practices at a systems level, we used implementation science to guide our work and provide examples of how EI systems seeking ways to create sustainable quality services may build upon our approach.

    Keywords: coaching, Fidelity measurement, Part C early intervention, Professional Development, Results Driven Accountability

    Received: 30 Apr 2024; Accepted: 08 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Tomchek, Wheeler, Cheek, Little and Dunn. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Scott Tomchek, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.