How to improve teaching practice?: an experimental comparison of centralized training and in-classroom coaching

We experimentally compare two modes of in-service professional development for South African public primary school teachers. In both modes teachers received the same learning materials and daily lesson plans, aligned to the official literacy curriculum. Pupils exposed to two years of the program improved their reading proficiency by 0.12 standard deviations if their teachers received centralized Training, compared to 0.24 if their teachers received in-class Coaching. Classroom observations reveal that teachers were more likely to split pupils into smaller reading groups, which enabled individualized attention and more opportunities to practice reading. Results vary by class size and baseline pupil reading proficiency.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Human Science Research Council SA
Published
2026-05-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14749/32380656
Primary Topic
Reading and Literacy Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How to improve teaching practice?: an experimental comparison of centralized training and in-classroom coaching

Human Sciences Research Council
Human Science Research Council SA
Reading and Literacy Development
article

How to improve teaching practice?: an experimental comparison of centralized training and in-classroom coaching

Human Sciences Research Council
article en

Abstract

We experimentally compare two modes of in-service professional development for South African public primary school teachers. In both modes teachers received the same learning materials and daily lesson plans, aligned to the official literacy curriculum. Pupils exposed to two years of the program improved their reading proficiency by 0.12 standard deviations if their teachers received centralized Training, compared to 0.24 if their teachers received in-class Coaching. Classroom observations reveal that teachers were more likely to split pupils into smaller reading groups, which enabled individualized attention and more opportunities to practice reading. Results vary by class size and baseline pupil reading proficiency.

Human Science Research Council SA
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Reading and Literacy Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.