A Comparative Analysis of In-person Versus Virtual Literacy Coaching to Support Tutor Intervention Fidelity

Despite the increasing emphasis on instructional coaching to enhance intervention fidelity, limited research has compared the effectiveness of in-person versus virtual coaching modalities in structured literacy intervention programs. This study addresses this gap by exploring how coaching modality affects tutor intervention fidelity within the Reading Corps high-impact tutoring program. The central research question was: How does in-person literacy coaching compare to virtual literacy coaching in terms of tutor intervention fidelity? Using a causal-comparative design, the study analyzed archival fidelity check data from two school years: 2018–2019 (in-person coaching) and 2020–2021 (virtual coaching). The sample comprised four tutors, two in each condition, with 131 intervention fidelity observations. Tutors provided structured literacy interventions to K–3 students, and fidelity was assessed by trained coaches using standardized observation tools known as intervention integrity observation checklists. Initial quantitative analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between the in-person and virtual coaching groups. Tutors who received virtual coaching achieved higher average fidelity scores (M = 97.63%, SD = 4.57) than those who received in-person coaching (M = 92.31%, SD = 8.22). In post hoc analyses, the finding that virtual coaching yielded higher intervention fidelity persisted when controlling for intervention type and coaching fidelity. These analyses showed large effect sizes (Hedges’ g = -0.69 to -0.77) along with statistically significant differences between groups. While consistent, findings must be interpreted in light of their limitations, including small sample size, non-randomized design, and confounding variables. Nonetheless, the results suggest that virtual coaching can effectively promote high fidelity in literacy interventions and may provide practical advantages in resource-limited or geographically dispersed contexts. The study adds to the evidence base for technology-enabled coaching models and informs program leaders and policymakers about the potential scalability of virtual coaching. Future research should further investigate the connection between intervention fidelity and student outcomes, as well as explore the generalizability of virtual coaching across diverse educational environments.