Switch course ▾
Session 1. From Good Individuals to a Designed Programme
Objective. Decide what a school or cluster coaching and mentoring programme is for, choose the right form for each group of teachers, write a one-page design brief with a simple chain of results, and map the stakeholders who must support it.
A coaching programme usually begins with enthusiasm and a good idea. Whether it lasts depends on what is decided before the first meeting: what it is for, who it serves, how it is meant to work and who must agree. This lesson goes further than the key ideas: it shows how to test the assumptions inside your plan and how to choose forms when time and trained people are scarce, so that your first year teaches you something even if it is small.
Key ideas
Why a system, not goodwill
- One enthusiastic coach helps a few teachers. A programme makes support fair (who gets it is decided by need, not by friendship), protected in time and able to continue when the enthusiast moves on.
- Courses 11.1 and 11.2 taught you to coach and mentor one colleague. This course asks a different question: what must the school or district build so that thirty colleagues can be supported well, not only one?
- Research warns that good intentions are not enough: a meta-analysis by Kraft, Blazar and Hogan (60 studies) found clear benefits of coaching, but the effects of larger programmes were only a fraction of those of small ones. Design, not size, protects quality.
Choose the form for the need
- Mentoring (course 11.2) fits teachers new to the profession or to the school: a trusted guide through the first one or two years.
- Coaching (course 11.1) fits any teacher who wants to improve one chosen practice through a cycle of goal, observation and feedback. It does not need a beginner.
- Peer coaching in pairs or trios fits colleagues of equal standing who trust each other and have little extra time. Most schools need two or three forms side by side, not one for everybody.
Start with the need, then draw the chain
- Evidence of need can be simple: how many beginners you have and how many left last year, themes from lesson visits, a subject where results are weak, requests from teachers. Write what you actually know, not what you assume.
- A theory of change is a short chain: what we put in (time, trained coaches), what we do (cycles, visits), what should change first (teachers' practice) and later (pupils' learning). The W.K. Kellogg Foundation logic model guide shows how to draw it.
- Write the one-page design brief before you recruit anyone: need, purpose in one sentence, who gets which form, time per week, roles, the chain, and two ways you will know it works.
Who must say yes: stakeholders and conditions
- List who can make or break the programme: the head, the deputy for academic work, department leaders, the teachers' council, the district methodist, the teachers themselves. Rate each on influence and interest and note one likely fear.
- The most common fear is that coaching is secretly inspection. A promise written in the design brief, that coaching notes never feed appraisal, removes the biggest barrier.
- Use a go / adapt / wait decision before launching: is there a clear need, protected time, a named coordinator, a head who agrees to the no-appraisal rule, and at least two willing coaches? If two answers are no, wait and fix them first.
Logic model in four boxes
What a theory of change adds to a plan
A plan lists activities: train five coaches, meet weekly, visit lessons. A theory of change says why those activities should lead to something: if coaches are trained and meet teachers weekly, then teachers try a new routine, and if they do, pupils will start work faster. Each 'if' is an assumption, and most programmes fail at one of them rather than at all of them.
Write the assumptions under each arrow of your logic model and mark the weakest. Typical weak assumptions are 'there will be time', 'teachers will trust coaches' and 'leaders will not use the notes for appraisal'. Test the weakest one first, in the first month, with a simple check such as whether the timetable actually contains the hours.
Choosing forms when resources are thin
Do not start with the form you like best; start with the group where the need and the risk are greatest. Beginners who may leave are usually first, because losing a teacher costs a school far more than the hours of a mentor. Volunteers who want to improve one practice are second, because they become champions. A department with a shared weak result is third.
Mix forms to save effort: a mentor for each beginner, one coaching cycle for a department led by its head, and peer trios for colleagues who simply want company. Say clearly in the design brief what each group receives and what it does not, so nobody feels they were promised a coach who does not exist.
Examples from the classroom
The assumption nobody checked
Scene. In a rural school near Samarkand, the head approves mentoring for five beginners. In the brief, the pair writes under the arrow 'Time exists?'. They look at the timetable: the two mentors share no free period with the beginners. Before starting they swap one duty each and move the beginners' free period, which takes a single afternoon. Without the check, the first month would have produced two cancelled meetings and the first complaint.
Insight. Testing the weakest assumption early is cheaper than discovering it through failure.
Coaching for a shared problem
Scene. A Tashkent school has weak results in fractions in Grades 5 to 7 for three years. Instead of starting with every teacher, the mathematics head invites the four Grade 6 teachers. They agree on one practice, a five-minute fractions check at the start, and each does one coaching cycle with the head. The purpose sentence is 'Every Grade 5 to 7 mathematics teacher has used the check by June'.
Insight. A programme linked to a specific problem and a short purpose sentence is easier to start, explain and evaluate.
Answering the fear of inspection
Scene. In Fergana region the district methodist maps six stakeholders. The deputy head, who appraises teachers, rates high on influence and shows concern: 'Will this replace my visits?'. The methodist writes the answer into the brief: coaching notes never enter appraisal, and the deputy keeps her visits. They meet her first, show her the sentence and ask for her view on how teachers will read it. She suggests asking teachers to sign the agreement themselves.
Insight. Naming a likely fear and answering it in writing turns the strongest sceptic into a co-designer.
Common pitfalls
- Writing a purpose such as 'improve teaching quality' that cannot be checked.
- Rolling out one form to everybody instead of matching forms to groups.
- Skipping the stakeholder who appraises teachers and then being surprised by their fear.
- Planning activities only, with no chain showing what should change in classrooms.
Write the Design Brief and Map the Stakeholders
- Trios (5 min): each person names the biggest support gap in their own school or cluster and the evidence they actually have for it (numbers, notes, requests). Do not solve anything yet.
- Trios (15 min): open the Activity Kit and read the three SAMPLE setting profiles. For each decide the best form or mix (mentoring, coaching, peer coaching), the scale to start with, and what extra evidence of need you would ask for. Write one line of reasoning each.
- Whole group (10 min): compare decisions. Where did trios disagree, and what did the disagreement depend on (size, time, trust, the head)? The facilitator lists the factors on the board.
- Pairs (25 min): fill in the one-page design brief from the Kit for your own school or cluster: need and evidence, purpose in one sentence, who gets which form, hours per week, roles, the four-box chain (inputs, activities, change in teachers, change in pupils) and two indicators. Swap with another pair, who ask only 'How will you know?'.
- Part B, pairs (20 min): build a stakeholder map for your brief. List six people or groups, rate influence and interest from 1 to 3, write one likely fear and one message that answers it. Choose the first two conversations you will hold and when.
- Alone (10 min): write the leadership task from the Kit and decide who in your school will read your brief and give feedback.
Your facilitator will guide you through this activity in the session.
Questions to discuss
- Which fact about need did you not yet have, and how will you collect it without a big survey?
- Which stakeholder did you rate high on influence and low on interest, and what would move them?
- If your head accepted only one promise from the brief, which would it be and why?
Reflect
- Where in your school does support depend on one person who might leave?
- What is the strongest evidence of need you could show to your head tomorrow?
- What would you stop doing so that coaching has a real place in the week?
Try it tomorrow
- Draw your own logic model on half a page and write one assumption under each arrow.
- Count how many beginners left your school in the last two years and ask two of them, if possible, what would have helped.
- Say your purpose sentence aloud to a colleague and ask, 'How would we know?'.
Further reading and links
Design before you recruit: a clear need, the right form, a short chain of results and the people who must say yes.