Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Team Coaching in Teacher Teams

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Supporting Workplace Learning

Part of the book series: Professional and Practice-based Learning ((PPBL,volume 5))

  • 1689 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter reports the results of a study of the relationships between team coaching, team cohesion, and team learning in teacher teams within higher education. It was expected that when a team leader acts as a coaching leader, this may lead to a stronger attraction among the team members (Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. (2005). Team diagnostic survey: Development of an instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41, 373–398), which in turn may result in a greater willingness to share and discuss information among team members. We conducted cross-sectional survey research, collecting data by means of a written questionnaire among 90 teacher teams within 13 institutions for higher professional education in the Netherlands. The results show that team-learning processes may be stimulated by creating team cohesion. Team coaching does not lead directly to team learning but is able to create conditions for team learning by helping the team members to build a collective commitment and to improve their interpersonal relationships. Also, teams with clear boundaries and high interdependency among members proved to experience more team learning than other teams. The chapter discusses the implications of these findings for research and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akgün, A. E., & Lynn, G. S. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of team stability on new product development performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 19, 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Boston, MA: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability. In K. Klein & S. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multi-level theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolhuis, P., Hoffius, R. G. H., & Grijpstra, D. H. (2007). Zwaar weer op komst. Arbeidsmarktmonitor voor personeel in het hbo 2007 [Severe weather to come: Labor market statistics personnel in Higher Education]. Retrieved May 19, 2008, from http://www.arbeidsmarktvisie.nl/media/pdf/B3268.pdf

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviours are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 288–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castka, P., Bamber, C. J., Sharp, J. M., & Belohoubek, P. (2001). Factors affecting successful implementation of high performance teams. Team Performance Management, 7, 123–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CBS (2007). Jaarboek onderwijs in cijfers 2007. [Year book education in numbers 2007] Voorburg: Centraal bureau voor de statistiek. Retrieved May 19, 2008, from http://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/7776AD12-1045-4177-9423-1201982C8247/0/2007f162pub.pdf

  • Chan, C. A., Lim, L., & Keasberry, S. K. (2003). Examining the linkages between team learning behaviors and team performance. The Learning Organization, 10, 228–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. C. A., Pearson, C., & Entrekin, L. (2003). Examining the effects of internal and external team learning on team performance. Team Performance Management, 9, 174–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, A., & Bordia, P. (2001). A multidimensional approach to the group cohesion – group performance relationship. Small Group Research, 32, 379–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, S., Fauske, J., & Pounder, D. G. (2004). Teacher work group effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40, 663–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Critchley, B., & Casey, D. (1996). Second thoughts on team building. Management Education and Development, 15, 163–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbins, G. H., & Zaccaro, S. J. (1986). The effects of group cohesion and leader behavior on subordinate satisfaction. Group & Organization Studies, 11, 203–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egberts, M. E., Verheul, A. D., Fisscher, O. A. M., & Vinke, R. H. W. (1993). De manager als Coach [The manager as coach]. Deventer: Kluwer Bedrijfswetenschappen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellinger, A. D. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of coaching behavior. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 16, 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellinger, A. D., & Bostrom, R. P. (1999). Managerial coaching behaviors in learning organizations. The Journal of Management Development, 18, 752–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellinger, A. D., Ellinger, A. E., & Keller, S. B. (2003). Supervisory coaching behavior, employee satisfaction, and warehouse employee performance: A dyadic perspective in the distribution industry. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14, 435–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellinger, A. E., Ellinger, A. D., & Keller, S. B. (2005). Supervisory coaching in a logistics context. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35, 620–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. P. J., Hollenbeck, J. R., Porter, C. O. L. H., Ilgen, D. R., West, B. J., & Moon, H. (2003). Team learning: collectively connecting the dots. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 821–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelen, A. J. A. (2002). Coaching binnenstebuiten. Een onderzoek naar coaching van docenten door docenten [Coaching inside out. A study of peer coaching among teachers]. Nijmegen: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R. (1983). Group dynamics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geijsel, F., & Meijers, F. (2005). Identity learning: the core process of educational change. Educational Studies, 31, 419–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gittleman, M., Horrigan, M., & Joyce, M. (1998). ‘Flexible’ workplace practices: Evidence from a nationally represented survey. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 52, 99–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goleman, D. (2000). Leiderschap dat resultaten oplevert [Leading for results]. HRMagazine, 46, 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory on team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30, 269–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houldsworth, C., & Mathews, B. P. (2000). Group composition, performance and educational attainment. Education & Training, 42, 40–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2, 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacson, N., & Bamburg, J. (1992). Can schools become learning organizations? Educational Leadership, 50, 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasl, E., Marsick, V. J., & Dechant, K. (1997). Teams as learners: A research-based model of team learning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33, 227–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, R. E., Jr., Mossholder, K. W., & Bennet, N. (1997). Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior. A multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals. Journal of Management, 23, 775–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluijtmans, F., Becker, B., Crijns, M., & Sewandono, I. (2005). Anders leren, anders organiseren!? [Learn differently, organize differently]. Nederland: Open Universiteit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, P, Tait, J., & Yorke, M. (2006). The professional learning of teachers in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 319–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, A. (2000). Networks as learning communities: Shaping the future of teacher development. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 221–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Matthew, S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalisin, M. D., Karau, S., & Tangpong, C. (2004). The effects of performance and team cohesion on attribution: A longitudinal simulation. Journal of Business Research, 57, 1108–1115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montes, F. J. L., Moreno, A. R., & Morales, V. G. (2005). Influence of support leadership and teamwork cohesion on organizational learning, innovation and performance: An empirical examination. Technovation, 25, 1159–1172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravec, M., Johannessen, O. J., & Hjelmas, T. A. (1997). Thumbs up for self-managed teams. Management Review, 86, 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muncey, D. E., & Conley, S. (1999). Teacher compensation and teacher teaming: Sketching the terrain. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 4, 365–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning-a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterman, P. (2000). Work reorganization in an era of restructuring: Trends in diffusion and effects on employee welfare. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53, 179–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1991). Managing change for competitive success. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pillai, R., & Williams, E. A. (2004). Transformational leadership, self-efficacy, group cohesiveness, commitment and performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17, 144–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, M., & Lipshitz, R. (1992). Coaching on leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 13, 15–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pounder, D. G. (1999). Teacher teams: Exploring job characteristics and work-related outcomes of work group enhancement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 317–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prien, K. O. (2000). The effects of cooperative learning, cohesion, and commitment on team performance. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 454, 249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savelsbergh, C. (2010). Team learning behaviors, role stress and performance in project teams. PhD dissertation, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seezink, A., & Van der Sanden, J. M. M. (2005). Lerend werken in de docentenwerkplaats: Praktijktheorieën van docenten over competentiegericht voorbereidend middelbaar beroepsonderwijs. [Learning and working within a ‘teachers’ workplace’: Teachers’ practical theories about competence-oriented prevocational secondary education]. Pedagogische Studiën, 82(4), 275–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: the psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, A., & Saunders, M. N. K. (1998). What if line managers don’t realize they’re responsible for HR? Personnel Review, 27, 460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Linden, R., Teurlings, C., & Vermeulen, M. (2003). De school als professionele Organisatie. Opbrengsten van vijf jaar kortlopend onderwijs onderzoek (1998–2002) [The school as professional organization. Results of five years of short term educational research (1998–2002)]. Tilburg: IVA beleidsonderzoek en advies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vegt, G. S., Bunderson, J. S., & Oosterhof, A. (2006). Expertness diversity and interpersonal helping in teams: Why those who need the most help end up getting the least. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 877–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education teacher learning. Higher Education, 50, 447–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Offenbeek, M. (2001). Processes and outcomes of team learning. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Veen, K., Sleegers, P., Bergen, T., & Klaassen, C. (1999). Opvattingen van docenten in het voortgezet onderwijs over hun professionaliteit. Pedagogisch Tijdschrift, 24(4), 401–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vianen, A. E. M., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2001). Personality in teams: Its relationship to social cohesion, task cohesion, and team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Woerkom, M. (2010). The relation between broad professional identity, professionalization activities and a broad coaching style of teacher educators. In M. Van Woerkom & R. F. Poell (Eds.), Workplace Learning. Concepts, measurement and application. London: Routledge, pp. 200–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Woerkom, M., & Sanders, K. (2010). The romance of learning from disagreement. The effect of cohesiveness and disagreement on knowledge sharing behavior and individual performance within teams, Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 139–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Woerkom, M., & Van Engen, M. L. (2009). Learning from conflicts? The effect of task and relationship conflicts on team learning and team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 381–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wageman, R. (1997). Critical success factors for creating superb self-managing teams. Organizational Dynamics, 26, 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science, 12, 559–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. (2005). Team diagnostic survey: Development of an instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41, 373–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, E. A., & Duray, R. (2006). Teamwork orientation, group cohesiveness, and student learning: A study of the use of teams in online distance education. Journal of Management Education, 30, 592–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. M., Goodman, P. S., & Cronin, M. A. (2007). Group learning. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1041–1059.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaccaro, S. J. (1991). Nonequivalent associations between forms of cohesiveness and group-related outcomes: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellmer-Bruhn, M., & Gibson, C. (2006). Multinational organization context: Implications for team learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 501–518.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Renée van Schaik, MSc, and Tessa de Nijst, MSc, for their work on this research project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Marianne van Woerkom

Authors
  1. Marianne van Woerkom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marianne van Woerkom .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Dept Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Postbus 90153, Tilburg, 5000 LE, Netherlands

    Rob F. Poell

  2. Dept. Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands

    Marianne van Woerkom

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Woerkom, M. (2011). Team Coaching in Teacher Teams. In: Poell, R., van Woerkom, M. (eds) Supporting Workplace Learning. Professional and Practice-based Learning, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9109-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation