A Leadership Strategy: Coaching, A Singaporean Example
A Leadership Strateg y: Coaching , A Singaporean Example
Marjory A. Ebbeck 0 1
0 Connie Seah Geok Lian University of South Australia
1 University of South Australia
University of South Australia
Connie Seah Geok Lian
Agape Little Uni. Pte Ltd, Singapore
The structure of this paper starts with a discussion of comparable poor industrial
conditions for early childhood personnel in Australia and Singapore. Issues of change are
embedded in the paper as coaching, a leadership strategy, is examined in the context of a research
study conducted in Singapore. The findings of the study are discussed with some concluding
comments presented in relation to how coaching could be a useful approach for staff development
in Early Childhood Education (ECE).
The status and career opportunities of early childhood graduates are problematic in many
writing of the Australian scene states that this is a global issue as
there is no consensus of clarity on what is expected of ECE graduates at the time of graduation
from a three or four-year degree. The Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority
(ACECQA) (2011) is responsible for the accreditation of course content but
further proposes that there is limited progress in ECE in addressing issues of public
visibility, validations and career pathways linked to formal qualifications.
To some extent, similar problems are prevalent in Singapore in the early childhood
workforce. Accreditation of teaching qualifications is carried out by the Early Childhood
Development Agency (ECDA), a semi-Government Authority somewhat analogous to the
Australian ACECQA. All early childhood educators and other early childhood workers are
required to be certified by ECDA to be employed in child care or kindergartens (ECDA, 2017c).
It can be stated that the early childhood workforce the world over is characterized by low levels of
academic achievement, poor industrial conditions including low salary and high attrition rates
(Ang, 2012; Vandell & Wolfe, 2000)
Most employers in Singapore need to provide some form of in-service training or other
staff development to extend preservice training, upgrade their staff and to improve job
satisfaction. This is consistent with the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Standard
6) which identifies “engage in professional learning” as an essential standard
for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL], 2014, p. 5)
. Likewise, Singaporean teachers need
to broaden their professional knowledge and practice. There are many ways of doing this and the
ultimate outcome is to improve the quality of teaching and learning. The quest, then, to improve
the quality of early childhood education and care is a common goal in many countries. Quality
teaching is fundamental to achieving this goal and Singapore, being a small city-state where
people are the only natural resource, is no exception. The need to improve early childhood
teaching, and hence, children’s learning, prompted the Singapore Government as well as early
childhood leaders to search for staff development programmes that aim to improve teaching
quality as well as job satisfaction. Bloom, Hentschel, and Bella (2010, p. 8) highlight that
“although staff development is usually advocated as a way to improve teachers’ skills in working
with children, it should also be recognised as an important ingredient in a satisfying and
stimulating professional life.”
Like governments in many other developed countries, the Singaporean Government has
created policies in an attempt to ensure quality curriculum exists in all early childhood education
centres. The Singapore Prime Minister, in his 2007 National Day Rally Speech, reiterated that
“education is the best way to level up our society. Our aim is to give every child a top-rate
education. Therefore, our emphasis is on the quality of all our schools in Singapore”
The processes, strategies, contents, and outcomes of early childhood centres have differed over the
past decades, as has their quality. Many centres have engaged consultants and external evaluators
to work with them in assisting to meet the government’s thrust to improve quality standards
2012; MacBeath & McGylnn, 2004; Murphy, 2005)
The Change Process and the Implications for Leaders
Early childhood teacher education in Australia has experienced many changes in the last
decade. The specialist nature of early childhood programmes have been replaced with more
generalist teaching awards. University staff teaching in early childhood programmes have been
required to adapt to these changes and a review of University websites where this has occurred
shows the evidence. Change has also occurred at the delivery level of services and most of these
changes have been for the better as differing regulatory arrangements have been replaced,
bringing about consistency, reducing duplication and monitoring of quality assurance
(Commonwealth of Australia, 2010; Council of Australian Government [COAG], 2009a, 2009b).
The emphasis throughout this paper is that change has been one of the fundamental, constant
drivers of change in ECE teacher education and service delivery by providers in Australia
Early childhood teacher education and services in Singapore similarly have been subject
to many changes, similar to Australia, brought about in part by too rapid an expansion of child
care centres, insufficient staff, also as they are required to respond to Government policies in
relation to quality assurance regulations. So, then, effecting change remains a critical challenge for
early childhood services to remain viable in Singapore
(Ang, 2012; Chu, 2014; Fullan, 2006; Ng,
2004; Rodd, 2013)
. Change always challenges the roles and reactions of leaders. Ebbeck and
Waniganayake (2003) stated that if one believes that, planning and educating are important then in
times of rapid change, the role of a leader becomes critically important
As the people in an organisation experience change, it is the role and responsibility of their
leader, not only to steer the organisation forward but also to lead the people in the organisation to
accept the change in a positive way. In order to be relevant in today’s world, leaders are called to
‘think outside the box’
and lead change in proactive and diverse ways in early
(Bloom, 2014; Hsieh, 2013)
. As Chu (2014) states:
Making change happen in early care and education programmes is complex, and it
begins with increasing individual and organisational readiness. If mentors do not
find readiness for educational change present in a programme for young children,
then backing up and working, over a longer period, with others in the community may
be needed. (p. 105)
Change also has an impact on staff stability
. Research shows that staff
stability enhances positive developmental outcomes and more secure attachment for young
children (Bloom, 2014; Commodari, 2013; Dinehart, Katz, Manfra, & Ullery, 2013). Teachers
remain the key factor in providing quality education for young children. As such, reducing staff
high turnover inevitably becomes a crucial factor in maintaining quality care; otherwise, the
continuity of care for young children may be compromised. In addition, “many research findings
have also indicated that if there is a single, most important factor in achieving high-quality early
childhood services, it is the quality of the workforce”
(Ang, 2012, p. 49)
. To enable a staff team to
act requires a leader who is sensitive to group collaboration and individual accountability
& Posner, 2007; Rodd, 2013)
In each centre in Singapore, it is the principal’s responsibility to assist in a professional
development journey that nurtures staff. As such, the principal is the leader who motivates their
staff to work in order to sustain change. The responsibility for making a difference in the quality
of early childhood centres rests in the hands of the principal, who often manages the change
process through staff development processes.
argues that “when the leader
develops others, they become better, they do the job better and both leader and the organisation
benefit, everybody wins” (p. 229). In a competitive world (and the early childhood education
centres are usually located in the commercial sector), all principals realise that a stable and
welltrained workforce could give them a competitive edge so as to attract more students and staff
(Dibble, 1999; Mooney & Munton, 2002)
In coping with the competing demands of change, principals in early childhood centres in
Singapore face considerable pressure as their roles are multi-faceted, including: managing and
supervising staff; liaising with parents and other professionals; supporting and developing staff;
managing budgets; increasing enrolment; and coordinating roles and responsibilities in the
operation of their centre
. In addition, they are also accountable to the different
government ministries for maintaining licensing requirements. Researchers have indicated that
principals spend 34% of their time in activities such as administration, attending to parents and
calls, managing and supervising their staff and only devote 16% of their time supporting and
(Muijs, Aubrey, Harris, & Briggs, 2004; Rodd, 2013)
. In other words, principals,
out of necessity, focus on management and maintenance rather than on developing their staff.
Change is defined as a process, not a one-time event and it happens over time
2005; Ebbeck & Waniganayake, 2003)
. However, “time is needed to broadly educate, gather
evidence for needed proactive changes, and to build enthusiastic readiness” (Chu, 2014, p. 105).
has identified some of the blocks that are encountered by those engaged in
the change process:
• Uncertainty or fear of change can be a significant block.
• Change being enforced and “top-down” rather than involving all stakeholders at the
• Insufficient information about a proposed change can create a block as if staff do not
understand it then they cannot be expected to support it.
The process of change then, as mentioned earlier, needs time if it is to be effective. Human
beings are creatures of habit and it takes time for people to accept a new idea and adapt it into
their daily practices
. The natural reaction to change in human nature is
resistance. However, there are stages in the implementing of any change process. In the initial
stage, people will deny change, next they will resist it, thereafter they will tentatively explore the
new ideas and actions being presented and eventually become committed to them
(Scott & Jaffe,
1989, cited in Humphries & Senden, 2000)
. These are the stages of response that are very
common during the change process. Therefore, a leader should not be negative when resistance to
change sets in, especially in the initial stage of the change process. Staff development training
often helps to bring about desired change in any organisation and this is what the research project
described here sets out to do
. As the Penn State Extension publication stated,
“effective coaching helps educators become more intentional in their practice, helps facilitate use
of best practices”
(Mincemoyer, 2013, p. 1)
How Coaching is Defined and what it involves
Many staff development programmes have been attempted in Singapore with varying
degrees of success
(Ang, 2012; ECDA, 2017a)
. However, a strategy becoming more commonly
used is that of coaching, an approach often associated only with sport. As Kimsey-House,
KimseyHouse, Sandahl, and Whitworth (2011) write, “Coaching as a field of interest has spread around
the world” (p. x). Some organisations have used this approach to shape their organisation and the
role of management
(Hunt & Weintraub, 2007; Rush, Shelden, & Hanft, 2003; Slater, 2007;
Western, 2012; Wise & Jacobo, 2010)
. Coaching has been defined as a “disciplined, structured
process where one or two people form an ongoing relationship for the improvement of
professional practice and achievement of goals”
(Twigg, Pendergast, Flückiger, Garvis, Johnson,
& Robertson, 2013, p. 74)
. Coaching is guiding people to learn what they can do rather than
telling them what they must do.
considers that a coach pushes a person to think,
to stretch themselves and, at the same time, to hold themselves accountable for their actions.
Coaching is a collaborative process whereby the coach serves as a catalyst for the coachee
to find answers they seek by asking thought-provoking questions. It also assists by focusing on
helping the coachee to move towards their desired goals
(Hunt & Weintraub, 2007; Rodd, 2006;
Stoltzfus, 2005; Whitmore, 2010)
. Coaching, then, is a short-term relationship as compared to
mentoring, which is more of a long-term relationship. Hence, a short-term relationship, like
coaching, may fit well in Singapore where more and more staff who cannot cope, tend to leave
their employment (Ang, 2012).
Leaders are needed to develop people. In the early childhood field, in Singapore, where
staff attrition rate is so high and time is not on the leader’s side, coaching may be a better option
for staff development than mentoring, for the coaching process may help staff to be more
forwardlooking rather than backward-looking in their behaviour. In recent years, many early childhood
centres and schools have adopted a coaching method when supporting the professional growth of
(Rodd, 2013; Rush, Shelden, & Hanft, 2003; Sheridan, Edwards, Marvin, & Knoche,
2009; Wise & Jacobo, 2010)
. Coaching is viewed as powerful because it is based on principles of
adult learning (Kolb, 1984/2015). It has been used by teachers and principals as a strategy to
promote collegiality, resolving particular instructions, learning new skills as well as refining and
sharpening those skills previously grasped
(Diamond & Powell, 2011; Rudd, Lambert,
Satterwhite, & Smith, 2009; Shidler, 2009)
There is a body of literature that identifies good coaching practices. These practices
include: providing opportunities to reflect, explore options, ‘think outside the box’
, show readiness to change
, and be able to set achievable goals
& Skaalvik, 2009; Robertson, 2008)
. There are many types of coaching in the literature but the
approach used in this study was an expert based coach with both goal-oriented and adult learning
approaches used (Rush & Shelden, 2011, p. 7).
Research has indicated there are many benefits in getting leaders within an organisation to
adopt a coaching behaviour. One obvious benefit is cost savings
(Frisch 2001; Hunt & Weintraub,
as compared with the fee required to hire an external coach. However, some leaders may
believe that an external coach may be more objective. An internal coach has an edge when
considering most aspects of the organisation and this insight will hasten the initial process of
suggesting a development agenda
(Frisch, 2001; Longenecker, 2010; Watt, 2004)
. Working in the
same organisation also means that the leader, as coach, can make observations of their staff and
give them immediate, constructive feedback (Frisch, 2001). Trust is viewed as an integral
characteristic of a coaching partnership and allows the coachee to be honest and open (Buell, Han,
Blamey, & Vukelich, 2010).
Objectives of the Study
In view of the issues confronting early childhood leaders in Singapore, it was decided to
embark on a study that sought to use a coaching approach with principals and their relevant staff
in order to investigate if a coaching strategy could bring about needed change. The broad aim of
this study was to examine if a ‘coaching approach’ was an appropriate strategy for staff
development in relation to changing their practice. This paper reports on part of a larger PhD study
and does not set out to present views of children or families in the centre. Ethics approval for the
study was conducted in the relevant University and at the Singaporean local level by the relevant
management committee including approval by parents and teachers involved.
The specific research question reported on in this paper is:
In what ways, if any, does coaching training become a change agent strategy that
supports a principal’s ability to coach the teachers?
In conducting the study, both quantitative and qualitative methods were used to provide a
comprehensive investigation into principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of a ‘coaching approach’
towards achieving a quality organisational climate. A multi-method research approach was
(Bloom, 2005; Creswell, 2014; McMurray, Pace, & Scott, 2004)
. This approach enabled
the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data incorporating multiple techniques within
and across each of the research stages. The multi-method approach enhanced the validity of the
study and allowed for the research question to be answered in more depth
McMurray, Pace, & Scott, 2004)
. Both process and product were deemed essential to the conduct
of the research study, process in terms of how the participants experienced the coaching process
and product being outcomes in terms of embracing change and demonstrating professional
A before-and-after design
was selected to assist the researchers to
investigate, without bias, if a ‘coaching approach’ intervention programme was an effective staff
development strategy. To determine the effectiveness of the intervention there were two
investigation points. The data were obtained by means of pre-test and post-test measures including
interviews before-and-after the implementation of the coaching programme. The instruments used
to measure the outcomes outlined in the study included the Early Childhood Work Environment
Survey; Teacher’s Working Profile Questionnaire; Focus Group interviews and Observation Field
Notes, all designed by Bloom (2005). The procedures for implementation also followed very
closely those outlined in Bloom’s extensive and helpful publications (Bloom, 2005, 2014).
The study was conducted in Singapore in seven child care centres offering child care
programmes for children from 18 months to below 6 years of age. All seven child care centres in
the study were licensed for operation by the Early Childhood Development Agency to operate as a
child care centre (ECDA, 2017b). The study included 7 principals and 72 teachers (see Table 1).
Before the intervention began the principals underwent intensive training by the
researchers. Training involved five steps so as to guide a coach through a coaching session. These
five steps were 1. Connect: Engage, 2. Outcome: Determine Session Goal, 3. Awareness:
Reflective Dialogue, 4. Course: Action steps, and 5. Highlights: Learning and Action Steps
. This process helped to prepare the principals for the work ahead in the
intervention with their respective staff group members.
In addition, a focus group was set up which met regularly where at meetings, principals
were supported by their coach and able to share their insights into the coaching process and how it
was progressing. The focus group meetings were one of the significant aspects of the study. This
was indeed one of the significant aspects of the study.
There are many models of leadership, however, as Hujala, Waniganayake and
, stated “leadership is not easily dissected and understood because it is essentially a
holistic, multi-dimensional and multi-layered complex phenomena that, to be effective is
embedded in the context which it is enacted” (p. 29). In this study, principals were encouraged to
participate in what is known as a “distributive model of leadership” whereby the collective views
were shared and individual views were seen to be important as collaborative, participative, shared
. This model was chosen for this study as it was a move away
from a leadership top-down model with an individual leader making decisions without
collaboration. The planned focus group discussions were ideal for this sort of shared distributive
model and the collaborative nature of coaching, as discussed earlier in the paper, lent itself to this
The intervention itself was conducted over a six-month period and included the seven
principals meeting with their relevant staff on a weekly basis and discussing the coaching issues
which had been determined. The intervention strategies focused on were: assisting the teachers to
be self-reflective, to question their practices, to be critical thinkers, to be able to set goals and be
able to accept feedback from their coach.
These strategies were the ones that would help the teachers to cope with change, to
improve the classroom climate, to manage classroom issues that impinged on the teachers’ work.
These discussions occurred in a climate of openness. Teachers were encouraged to be open about
issues that needed clarification. Over time, there emerged in the teachers a willingness to be
flexible when accepting the changes agreed upon by coachee and coach.
The strategies for principals were to improve their listening behaviours, to also be more
receptive to change and to be more flexible in their work with teachers as they helped them to
identify needed changes in the classrooms.
The teachers in the study, participating in adult modes of learning, were assisted to build
new knowledge, skills and capacities and were able with support of a coach to function with
increased confidence and flexibility. It was hoped that by the end of the study the teachers would
be able to work effectively and independently.
Making provision for time is always problematic but in the research study the principals
and teachers always planned a month in advance and it seemed to work well. It is the policy of
most centres in Singapore to allow 1-2 hrs a week for some sort of planning. This could be
changed into longer periods of time if staff preferred, on occasion, block of 2 hrs, for example,
Gathering the Data
A pilot test was conducted prior to the implementation of the main study to determine the
validity and reliability of the instruments (Bloom, 2005). The instruments proved to be effective
and pre-intervention questionnaires, interviews and observations were conducted and analysed
before the intervention began. Coaching training was set up for the seven principals followed with
a six-month intervention programme in the seven centres. The researcher visited the centres
weekly, maintaining regular contact with those involved in the intervention. She observed how the
classroom observations were conducted and likewise how the interviews were managed. As with
the pilot step, all observations were conducted in accord with the procedures outlined by Bloom
(2005, 2014). The post-intervention data from questionnaires, interviews and observations were
collected and analysed after implementation of the intervention programme.
Data Analysis Process
A series of paired sample t-test were conducted to examine if there were any significant
changes before and after the intervention. Significance level of 0.05 and below was established to
identify any significant change in the result. Cohen’s (1988) d was computed to check if the effect
sizes were large enough to have any implication. One-way ANOVA test was administered to
check if there were any differences between the centres.
Results and Discussion
Flexibility to Change
As seen in Figure 1, initially both teachers and principals were not very dynamic or
change-oriented as they scored 10.90 and 10.00 respectively, out of 20. The benchmark for this
assessment to be considered as dynamic or change-oriented needed to be a score smaller than 6 for
the tools that were used as the basis for this assessment (Bloom, 2005). In spite of the lesser
dynamic views of participants prior to intervention, both teachers and principals developed a
mind-set that was more dynamic and change-oriented after the intervention. The intervention
helped both groups to be more dynamic, as they scored 3.33 and 3.86 respectively after the
A paired sample t-test was conducted to check if a change in the score for flexibility and
openness for pre- and post-intervention periods was significant. The test showed that the
difference was statistically significant for both teachers and principals at the significance level of
0.01. There was a significant difference in the score for teachers for pre-intervention (n=72,
M=10.90, SD=2.53) and post-intervention (n=72, M=3.33, SD=2.43); t (71) =-21.35, p < 0.01.
There was also a significant difference for principals for pre-intervention (n=7, M=10.00,
SD=6.49) and post-intervention (n=7, M=3.86, SD=1.47; t (6) =-10.33, p < 0.01. The effect size
for both teachers (Cohen’s d=2.51) and principals (Cohen’s d=3.91) was large.
One-way ANOVA test was conducted to check if there was any difference for the scores
for pre-intervention and post-intervention among the centres. The subgroup analysis was limited
because of the small sample size of some centres such as C1 which had only 4 in the sample size.
For pre-intervention, there were some differences between the centres, but these differences were
not statistically significant at p < 0.05 (F (6, 65) = 0.945, p = 0.469). However, the differences
between the centres after the post-intervention were statistically significant at p < 0.05 (F (6, 65) =
2.475, p = 0.032). Hence, the results showed that the intervention had a positive impact on the
flexibility and openness to change of teachers, regardless of the centres they were working in.
The results for flexibility and openness to change also contributed to the improvement in
the performance of the teachers. Results showed that the teachers were more willing to talk about
issues in the centres and were more prepared to change for the better. As a consequence, the
centres have come to recognise that the principals need to be the agent of change, intentionally
coaching their staff so as to imbue their teachers with the need for flexibility and openness to
change (see Table 2).
The coaching training showed an improvement in principals’ listening behaviours. This
helped the principals see the importance of effective listening. As a general guideline, an overall
score between 15 and 20 indicated that respondents felt their principal was attentive, genuinely
interested and supportive when engaged in conversation. A score lower than 5 indicated the needs
for principals to build stronger listening and communication skills (Bloom, 2005).
Before the intervention programme, the teachers’ evaluation of the principals’ listening
behaviours was low; the score for positive statements was only 5.99 out of 10 and the score for
negative statement was nearly 10. The overall score was 6.36, which was just above the threshold
of a level (5 points), which reflected the need to build extensive listening and communication
After the intervention programme, the score for positive statements increased from 5.99 to
9.42, while the score for negative statement decreased dramatically from 9.62 to 0.50. The overall
score also went up from 6.36 to 18.91 reaching the level that indicates teachers felt their principals
were attentive and genuinely interested in their conversation. Paired sample t-test was conducted
to check if the difference between the overall score before (n=72, M=6.36, SD=2.66) and after the
intervention (n=72, M=18.91, SD=1.14) was statistically significant. It was found that the
difference was statistically significant at p < 0.01 level; t (71) = 37.411, p < 0.01 (see Figure 2).
Listening behaviour is an important element in a ‘coaching approach’. The results show
that, over time, the principals practised the art of listening and had come to understand that being
an effective coach means they must first learn to be an effective listener.
Negative Score (0 – 10)
(0 – 20)
To find out if the coaching training was effective, qualitative data were collected using
focus group interviews. As the overall design of the study was a mixed method approach, means
testing analysis was conducted to determine possible differences in the quantitative data that were
used to triangulate the quantitative findings.
Results from the qualitative data indicated that coaching training for the principals was
helpful and improved the relationship between principals and teachers, assisted them to be more
effective in applying time management, motivated them to see their staff grow, become more
confident, and helped them to see the capabilities of their staff and the importance of staff
development (see Table 3).
Post-Intervention (n = 7)
Better relationship as we get to know each other better
Helps me to be more disciplined and learn good time management
Motivated to see staff grow/confident and independent
Helps me to see the capabilities of my staff and the importance of staff
Able to see their viewpoint better and empathise with the challenges they
I learn to step back and I learn a lot from my staff too
Teachers appreciate my care in coaching them to do better
The coaching programme was useful for the teachers as it assisted them to reflect on who
they were, to identify what their profession required and the purpose of their work. It also enabled
them to manage their classes better as well as to be more focused in their tasks.
The coaching also aided teachers to be more confident, independent and able to function
better. They realised their capability; strengths and weaknesses better (see Table 4).
Post-Intervention (n = 71)
It helps me to know who am I/Helps me to identify what this profession
requires and the purpose in this field
Helps me to manage my class better
Helps me to be focused and disciplined/ I am more disciplined and systematic
in approaching my task
I am more confident as a teacher / Increase my confidence level/ I am able to
function better and be more independent
Help realise my capability, strengths and weaknesses better
Helps me to see that I am not alone, and I can rely on my principal to coach
and guide me in my professional walk
Training supported the principals in gaining a skill that was useful in the coaching
programme – a skill to help the teachers in setting their goals; developing an action plan and
asking appropriate questions. The training also helped them to realise the importance of attitude as
an essential element in coaching (see Table 5).
Post-Intervention (n = 7)
Learning how to ask right questions to support the teachers in their
goals and action plan
Attitude as a Key towards coaching
Helps one to be sensitive to teachers’ feeling on coaching
Provide steps and good foundation in learning the right techniques for
Equipped one with the knowledge and skill, especially in handling the
Percent of Cases
Principals commented that regular meetings together with other centres’ principals had
also provided them with a common platform to discuss, in a more structured yet open manner, the
issues and concerns that all members experienced every day. This networking allowed principals
to learn from one another as well as develop a collaborative team approach
Waniganayake, 2003; Rodd, 2013)
that supported and accounted for one’s learning. Hence, it is
suggested that a coaching approach be offered as a choice when staff attend in-service training and
workshops. The coaching approach may build a sense of community of learners through peer
learning, mentoring and coaching
(Austin & Hopkins, 2004; Deci & Ryan, 1995, 2004, cited in
Wagner & French, 2010; Rodd 2013)
Challenges of the Study
These were more common at the beginning of the intervention when the process was new,
particularly to the teachers. The expectations of teachers varied and some felt inadequate. At the
beginning of the study collegiality of co-workers were rated at 77.8% and feedback and support
from supervisors at 40%. At the end of the study, collegiality of co-workers were rated at 95.8%
and feedback and support from supervisors at 86%. These results do highlight the importance of
principal’s support and feedback. The expectations of teachers changed positively over time.
The problem of staff retention was mentioned in the introduction section of this paper at
the completion of the study data study showed that over the 18-month period a total of 11 teachers
left the centres before the study was completed. Teacher attrition rate overall was 13.2 %. None of
the principals left and exit interviews were conducted with the teachers who did leave. Three
teachers cited low pay as the reason for leaving, five said they were looking for new challenges,
three said they needed more guidance from their principals. A rate of 13.2 % is low by Singapore
standards where there has and still is a very high attrition rate.
“Currently, the annual attrition rate for Singapore’s ECE sector is about 15 to 20 percent”,
Singapore, 12 August 2014
The most robust finding was that the coaching approach assisted principals with their
complex role of improving the quality of their centre. Specifically, the results showed that
effective child care centre principals need to focus on improving classroom instruction, not only
on managerial tasks. One way to improve teaching is to continuously improve oneself
2014; Hsieh, 2013; Maxwell, 2011; Rodd, 2013)
. The leader as coach offers an opportunity for
staff to grow together and thus develop a learning culture within the organisation
Lane, 2006; Frisch, 2001; Phillips, 1996)
In relation to embracing change the outcomes of the study did show that a trusting
relationship had developed between the principal and teacher. The openness that had resulted in
this trust helped teachers to set achievable goals and not to be reliant on someone telling them what
to do. The principals had shown confidence in their respective teachers encouraging them to think
for themselves and be more intentional in their teaching. Developing insights into one’s practices
by discussion and reflection through a coaching approach was a valuable outcome of the study.
The study results showed that a principal needs to take on a proactive role as a change
agent. Through the coaching process, principals learned to be more flexible and receptive to
change. Once they acquired the necessary knowledge and skills through learning within the centre,
they improved their instructional practices and developed effective communication and leadership
skills. When able to see improvement, they were motivated to keep going
implication here is that through change, the potential for improving staff professional growth can
be raised to a higher level of excellence. In addition, staff recruitment and retention in the early
childhood industry could be improved.
The principals, through their support to their staff, yielded many positive signs of change
in both classroom management and the organisational climate in their centres
& Bella, 2010; Chenot, Benton, & Kim, 2009; Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe,
Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002; Griffin, Patterson, & West, 2001)
. Confidence in teachers had grown
and they expressed the view at the end of the study that they now had the abilities and knowledge
to function without the support of a coach. Many of the teachers said that “the consistent support
and feedback motivated them to move towards providing quality early childhood programmes and
deepening their commitment to the children they care for” (Seah, 2014, p. 235). Too often, we
underestimate the power of care, a kind word, a smile, honest feedback and a genuine compliment
(Bloom, Hentschel, & Bella, 2010; Hsieh, 2013; Nolan, 2008)
. It is all these essential, often
unexpressed elements that empower staff.
Developing leadership is certainly a life-long learning journey. Leaders have to be change
agents. As mentioned earlier, change is a process, not a one-time event and it happens over time
(Bloom, 2005; Ebbeck & Waniganayake, 2003)
. If a change process is to be managed effectively
then leaders need to know the causes and effects that contribute to resistance to change. A
coaching approach can allow a leader to work in a distributive leadership style that values
participation, collaboration and the views of the staff. Given the diversity of ECE centres in
Singapore, the flexibility inherent in distributive leadership may allow for flexibility and
encourage commitment and reduce attrition.
Irrespective of the size, large or small, profit or non-profit, if ECE centres are to survive in
Singapore, they need to respond to change. Sometimes the changes will be top-down from
government, and regulatory in content, for example, change required to meet licensing standards
(ECDA, 2017b). The ECE environment in Singapore is very competitive and small centres may
offer a diversified programme, therefore, if high quality is evident, then whatever, the change
requires, it is important that the leader and staff discuss together, understand the need for change,
analyse what it means for them and plan for its implementation and achievement.
The results in this study showed that both teachers and principals gained in confidence and
did embrace change. The trust that was engendered in the coaching relationship was fundamental
to the acceptance of change. The findings of the study have relevance to other countries where
there is also a high attrition rate of staff as evident in the work of Bassoppo-Moyo (2010); Brown
and Wynn (2009);
Hughes, Matt, and O’Reilly (2015
). Principal support plays a prominent role as
to whether or not teachers stay in an organisation.
The role of the early childhood principal, whatever the country will remain complex for it
involves teamwork. Change is always occurring in both roles and responsibilities and this is one
of few constant principles of this profession
Finally, it can be said that this study shows that a coaching approach was implemented
successfully as a staff development strategy for early childhood principals and policymakers to
consider. The provision of early childhood services deeply affects the lives of young children and
families, thus, an investment in staff development is essential.
Ang , L. ( 2012 ). Vital voices for vital years: A study of leaders' perspectives on improving the early childhood sector in Singapore . Singapore: Lien Foundation.
Austin , M. J. , & Hopkins , K. M. (Eds.). ( 2004 ). Supervision as collaboration in the human services: Building a learning culture . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483328829
Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority . ( 2011 ). The National Quality Standard . http://www.acecqa. gov.au/storage/1%20Guide%20to%20the%20NQF.pdf
Early Childhood Development Agency. (2017b) . Guide to setting up a child care centre . https://www.childcarelink.gov.sg/ccls/uploads/CCC_Guide.pdf
Early Childhood Development Agency. (2017c) . Training for child care personnel . https://www.ecda.gov.sg/Pages/ Training-for- Child- Care-Personnel.aspx
Ebbeck , M. , & Waniganayake , M. ( 2003 ). Early childhood professionals leading today and tomorrow . Marrickville, Australia: Elsevier.
Eisenberger , R. , Stinglhamber , F. , Vandenberghe , C. , Sucharski , I. L. , & Rhoades , L. ( 2002 ). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention . Journal of Applied Psychology , 87 ( 3 ), 565 - 573 . http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/ 0021 - 9010 . 87 .3. 565
Fillery-Travis , A. , & Lane , D. ( 2006 ). Does coaching work or are we asking the wrong questions . International Coaching Psychology Review , 1 ( 1 ), 23 - 36 . https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/5797/1/Does_coaching_work.pdf
Frisch , M. H. ( 2001 ). The emerging role of the internal coach . Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research , 53 ( 4 ), 240 - 250 . https://doi.org/10.1037/ 1061 - 4087 . 53 .4. 240
Fullan , M. ( 2006 ). Change theory: A force for school improvement . Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 157 . http://michaelfullan.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/13396072630.pdf
Griffin , M. A. , Patterson , M. G. , & West , M. A. ( 2001 ). Job satisfaction and teamwork: The role of supervisor support . Journal of Organisational Behaviour , 22 ( 5 ), 537 - 550 . https://doi.org/10.1002/job.101
Hsieh , T. ( 2013 ). Delivering happiness: A path to profits, passion, and purpose . New York, NY: Business Plus.
Hughes , A. L. , Matt , J. J. , & O'Reilly , F. L. ( 2015 ). Principal support is imperative to the retention of teachers in hard-to-staff schools . Journal of Education and Training Studies , 3 ( 1 ), 129 - 134 . https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i1. 622
Hujala , E. , Waniganayake , M. , & Rodd , J . (Eds.). ( 2013 ). Researching leadership in early childhood education . http://ilrfec.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/art_00Kansi.pdf
Humphries , E. , & Senden , B. ( 2000 ). Leadership and change: A dialogue of theory and practice . Australian Journal of Early Childhood , 25 ( 1 ), 26 - 31 .
Hunt , J. M. , & Weintraub , J. R. ( 2007 ). The coaching organisation: A strategy for developing leaders . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329062
Kimsey-House , H. , Kimsey-House , K. , Sandahl , P. , & Whitworth , L. ( 2011 ). Co-active coaching: Changing business, transforming lives (3rd ed .). Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.
Kolb , D. ( 2015 ). Experiential learning: Experiences as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. (Original work published 1984 ).
Kotter , J. P. ( 2012 ). Leading change . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kouzes , J. M. , & Posner , B. Z. ( 2007 ). The leadership challenge (4th ed .). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kumar , R. ( 2014 ). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners (4th ed .). London, England: Sage.
Lee , H. L. ( 2007 ). Singapore Prime Minister's National Day Rally 2007 Speech . http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/view-html?filename=2007081907.htm
Leedham , M. ( 2005 ). The coaching scorecard: A holistic approach to evaluating the benefits of business coaching . International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring , 3 ( 2 ), 30 - 44 . http://ijebcm.brookes.ac.uk/documents/vol03issue2-paper-03.pdf
Longenecker , C. O. ( 2010 ). Coaching for better results: Key practices of high performance leaders . Industrial and Commercial Training , 42 ( 1 ), 32 - 40 . https://doi.org/10.1108/00197851011013698
MacBeath , J. , & McGlynn , A. ( 2004 ). Self-evaluation: What's in it for schools? London, England: Routledge.
Maxwell , J. C. ( 2011 ). The 360 degree leader: Developing your influence from anywhere in the organisation . Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
McMurray , A. J. , Pace , R. W. , & Scott , D. ( 2004 ). Research: A commonsense approach . Southbank, Australia: Thomson Social Science Press.
Mincemoyer , C. C. ( 2013 ). Coaching and mentoring - Building bridges to best practice . https://bkc.vmhost.psu.edu/documents/HO_CoachingArticle.pdf
Moen , F. , & Skaalvik , E. ( 2009 ). The effect from executive coaching on performance psychology . International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring , 7 ( 2 ), 31 - 49 . http://ijebcm.brookes.ac.uk/documents/vol07issue2-paper-03.pdf
Mooney , A. , & Munton , A. G. ( 2002 ). Research and policy in early childhood services: Time for a new agenda . London, England: Institute of Education, London University.
Muijs , D. , Aubrey , C. , Harris , A. , & Briggs , M. ( 2004 ). How do they manage? A review of the research on leadership in early childhood . Journal of Early Childhood Research , 2 ( 2 ), 157 - 169 . https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X04042974
Murphy , J . (Ed.). ( 2005 ). Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Ng , D. F. S. ( 2004 ). Change leadership: Communicating, continuing, and consolidating change . Singapore: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Nolan , M. ( 2008 ). Mentor coaching and leadership in early care and education . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Phillips , R. ( 1996 ). Coaching for higher performance . Employee Counselling Today , 8 ( 4 ), 29 - 32 . https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004132
Robertson , J. ( 2008 ). Coaching educational leadership: Building leadership capacity through partnership . London, England: Sage.
Rodd , J. ( 2006 ). Leadership in early childhood (3rd ed .). New York, NY: Open University Press.
Rodd , J. ( 2013 ). Leadership in early childhood: The pathway to professionalism . (4th ed.). Crows Nest , Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Rudd , L. C. , Lambert , M. C. , Satterwhite , M. , & Smith , C. H. ( 2009 ). Professional development + coaching = Enhanced teaching: Increasing usage of math mediated language in early childhood classrooms . Early Childhood Education Journal , 37 ( 1 ), 63 - 69 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0320-5
Rush , D. D. , & Shelden , M. L. ( 2011 ). The early childhood coaching handbook . Baltimore , MD: Paul H. Brookes
Rush , D. D. , Shelden , M. L. , & Hanft , B. E. ( 2003 ). Coaching families and colleagues: A process for collaboration in natural settings . Infants & Young Children , 16 ( 1 ), 33 - 47 . http://cehs01.unl.edu/ECSE/960/RushShelden.pdf https://doi.org/10.1097/ 00001163 - 200301000-00005
Seah , G. L. ( 2014 ). Staff development: A Singaporean study on classroom management using principals as change agents . (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) . University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Sheridan , S. M. , Edwards , C. P. , Marvin , C. A. , & Knoche , L. L. ( 2009 ). Professional development in early childhood programs: Process issues and research needs . Early Education & Development , 20 ( 3 ), 377 - 401 . https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802582795
Shidler , L. ( 2009 ). The impact of time spent coaching for teacher efficacy on student achievement . Early Childhood Education Journal , 36 ( 5 ), 453 - 460 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008- 0298-4
Simpson , J. ( 2010 ). In what ways does coaching contribute to effective leadership development? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, (4) , 114 - 133 . http://ijebcm.brookes.ac.uk/documents/special04-paper-09.pdf
Slater , D. ( 2007 ). Employment services: Coaching and mentoring . Adelaide, Australia: Technical and Further Education , South Australia (TAFE SA) .
Stoltzfus , T. ( 2005 ). Leadership coaching: The disciplines, skills and heart of a Christian coach . Charleston, SC: BookSurge.
Twigg , D. , Pendergast , D. , Flückiger , B. , Garvis , S. , Johnson, G. , & Robertson , J. ( 2013 ). Coaching for early childhood educators: An insight into the effectiveness of an initiative . International Research in Early Childhood Education , 4 ( 1 ), 73 - 90 . https://researchrepository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/55703/87687_1.pdf?sequence=% 25252 01
Vandell , D. L. , & Wolfe , B. ( 2000 ). Child care quality: Does it matter and does it need to be improved? https://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/sr/pdfs/sr78.pdf
Wagner , B. D. , & French , L. ( 2010 ). Motivation, work satisfaction, and teacher change among early childhood teachers . Journal of Research in Childhood Education , 24 ( 2 ), 152 - 171 . https://doi.org/10.1080/02568541003635268
Waniganayake , M. ( 2014 ). Being and becoming early childhood leaders: Reflections on leadership studies in early childhood education and the future leadership research agenda . Journal of Early Childhood Education Research , 3 ( 1 ), 65 ̶ 81 . http://jecer.org/wpcontent/uploads/20 1 .pdf
Watt , L. ( 2004 ). Mentoring and coaching in the workplace: An insight into two leading leadership development programs in organisations . Canadian Manager , 29 ( 3 ), 14 - 16 .
Webb , K. E. ( 2016 ). The Coach model for Christian leaders . North Charleston, SC: Active Results LLC. (Original work published 2004 )
Western , S. ( 2012 ). Coaching and mentoring: A critical text . Singapore: Sage https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446251577
Whitmore , J. ( 2010 ). Coaching for performance: Growing human potential and purpose: The principle and practice of coaching leadership (4th ed .). London, England: Nicholas Brealey.
Wise , D. , & Jacobo , A. ( 2010 ). Towards a framework for leadership coaching . School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation , 30 ( 2 ), 159 - 169 . https://doi.org/10.1080/13632431003663206