Skip to main content

Table 2 Coaching style statistics within a quality improvement collaborative

From: Adaptation of the Grasha Riechman Student Learning Style Survey and Teaching Style Inventory to assess individual teaching and learning styles in a quality improvement collaborative

 

Primary and secondary coaching style scores a

   

Coach

Revised delegator

Expert

Revised facilitator

Formal authority

Personal model

Coach intervention assignment b

Primary coaching profile

Secondary coaching profile

C001

4.86

3.63

4.86

2.63

2.88

C

Facilitator/Delegator

Expert

C002 c

6.00

5.75

6.57

5.25

6.50

CCM

Facilitator/Personal Model

Expert/Formal Authority

C003

6.71

5.63

5.00

4.75

4.88

ICC, CB

Delegator

Expert

C004 d

6.00

4.88

6.57

4.50

4.63

C, LS

Facilitator/Delegator

Expert/Formal Authority/Personal Model

C006

5.14

5.50

6.71

4.50

6.38

CB

Facilitator/Personal Model

Expert

C007

5.71

4.63

6.14

3.50

4.75

LS

Facilitator

Delegator

C008

5.29

3.88

5.71

4.13

5.00

CB

Facilitator/Delegator

Personal Model

C009 d

5.71

5.00

6.57

5.25

4.63

C, ICC

Facilitator/Delegator

Expert/Formal Authority

C010

5.67

5.71

6.83

4.43

4.86

CB

Facilitator

Delegator/Expert

C011

5.57

4.75

6.14

4.63

5.00

ICC,CB

Facilitator

Delegator

C012 e

5.29

5.50

6.29

4.38

5.38

CCM, ICC

Facilitator

Delegator/Expert/Personal Model

C013

5.86

4.00

5.71

3.63

4.13

C

Facilitator/Delegator

Expert/Formal Authority/Personal Model

C014

5.71

5.50

6.57

5.25

5.50

C, LS

Facilitator/Delegator

Expert/Formal Authority/Personal Model

C015 e

5.86

5.25

7.00

3.88

6.13

CCM, ICC

Facilitator/Personal Model

Delegator/Expert

C016

5.00

5.00

6.43

5.50

5.63

ICC,CB

Facilitator

Formal Authority/Personal Model

C017

5.57

4.25

6.86

3.00

2.63

C

Facilitator

Delegator

C018 d

5.00

4.88

5.57

2.75

5.00

CCM

Facilitator

Delegator/Expert/Personal Model

Average

5.59

4.92

6.21

4.23

4.93

   

St. Dev

0.46

0.67

0.64

0.89

1.04

   

Low

1.00–5.12

1.00–4.25

1.00–5.57

1.00–3.34

1.00–3.89

   

Medium

5.13–6.04

4.26–5.59

5.58–6.84

3.35–5.11

3.90–5.96

   

High

6.05–7.00

5.60–7.00

6.85–7.00

5.12–7.00

5.97–7.00

   
  1. a Scores in bold represent coaches in the high range for the associated style while italic scores represent those coaches with a score in the low range
  2. b Intervention Assignment: Coaching (C), Interest Circle (ICC), Learning Session (LS), Combination (CB) and Coaching only but in both the coach and combination interventions (CCM)
  3. c More providers in Washington State were randomized to the combination intervention resulting in one coach providing services to three providers in the coaching and four providers in the combination intervention arms
  4. d Due to the randomization of providers in Oregon and geographic proximity of the providers, coach (C004) provided services primarily to sites in the coaching intervention and one additional provider in the combination intervention. Coach (C009) worked primarily with providers in the combination intervention but provided services to one provider in the coaching intervention
  5. eTwo coaches (C012 and C015) coached providers in both the coaching and combination interventions due to a coach who was assigned providers in the combination intervention left the study. Their primary intervention arm as initially assigned was the coaching intervention
Back to article page

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

Contact us