When Coaches Overdo It

Effective teachers adjust the scaffolding provided so that a learning activity sits squarely within a student’s zone of proximal development. As coaches, we did it with our students - offering just enough support to move learning forward, then gradually stepping back when the support was no longer needed.
 
Coaching is no different.
 
Through dialogue, we scaffold teachers’ professional learning, and when it’s done well, it strengthens reflection and encourages flexible, intentional use of teaching practices. But when we offer too much support for too long, we risk getting in the way of the growth we’re aiming to cultivate. As coaches, we need to be careful not to over-scaffold.
 
Why Scaffolding Matters in Coaching
The Gradual Increase of Responsibility model (see below) describes how effective coaching shifts over time. Coaches might begin with higher levels of support—modeling and recommending, if that’s what’s needed. When less scaffolding is needed, we ask questions—and move toward moves like affirming and praising.
 
The GIR model supports coaches in matching support to need. When coaches intentionally adjust scaffolding, they help teachers of all experience levels stretch. This flexible, responsive support leads to real instructional change.
 
The Problem with Over-Scaffolding
Scaffolding supports learning – but did you know that giving too much support can actually undermine learning? Researchers found that continuing to model once a learner had gained competence reduced agency, damaged self-confidence, and reduced motivation.* And over-scaffolding can limit engagement and restrict responses.**
 
In coaching, this sometimes shows up when our “go-to” moves remain highly supportive—even when the teacher does not need that level of help. For example, a coach might continue recommending specific strategies to a highly capable teacher who could make those decisions independently. Or we might jump in to model when a reflective question would have been enough. The intention is good, but the impact isn’t. Over-scaffolding sends an unintended message: I don’t think you’re ready yet.
 
Matching Support to Need
Effective coaching means adjusting support in real time—stepping in when a teacher is trying something new and stepping back once they have traction.
Sometimes that scaffolding looks like:
 
*offering a specific recommendation when a teacher is trying out an unfamiliar strategy
 
*asking guiding questions to help a teacher think through the details of a lesson
 
*anticipating together how students might respond so a teacher can plan to be flexible
 
When support isn’t needed, we lower the scaffolding. And if movement stagnates, we step in with more support. The key is responsiveness, with scaffolding continuously adjusted—not fixed. When support is no longer needed, removing it is just as important as offering it in the first place.
 
Letting Teachers Take the Lead
Coaching for a gradual increase of teacher responsibility means trusting teachers’ increasing competence and confidence. It means resisting the urge to over-explain, over-model, or over-direct. It means knowing that teachers grow most when they’re supported enough to stretch—rather than over-scaffolded in ways that crowd out their agency.
 
As coaches, our role is to help teachers see what’s possible. When we match scaffolds to the moment, teachers develop stronger instructional decision-making, greater confidence, and an increased sense of ownership over their practice.
 
By avoiding the over-scaffold, we acknowledge that sometimes less support can lead to more learning.
 
****************************************************************************************************************

Did you know My Coaches Couch is also a podcast? (with different content) Find it in your favorite podcast app or at MyCoachesCouch.podbean.com
 
****************************************************************************************************************

 

*Wood, D. & Middleton, D. (1975). A study of assisted problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology (66)2, 181–91. Pomerantz, F., & Pierce, M. (2013). " When do we get to read?" Reading instruction and literacy mentoring in a" failed" urban elementary school. Reading Improvement, 50(3), 101-117.
**Daniel, S. M., Martin‐Beltrán, M., Peercy, M. M., & Silverman, R. (2016). Moving beyond yes or no: Shifting from over‐ scaffolding to contingent scaffolding in literacy instruction with emergent bilingual students. TESOL Journal, 7(2), 393-420.
 
This week, you might want to take a look at:

Overcoming the “drama triangle” when working with teams:
 
https://www.smartbrief.com/original/recognizing-and-overcoming-the-drama-triangle
 
 
Charts as tools and teachers:
 
https://choiceliteracy.com/article/charts-as-tools-charts-as-teachers/
 
 
Independent mentor text studies:
 
https://vimeo.com/1085805154/4e5ddc29d3
 
 
The role of identity in learning:
 
https://www.edutopia.org/video/when-social-brain-misfires
 
 
Using Interactive reading guides in science:
 
https://www.amnh.org/explore/curriculum-collections/integrating-literacy-strategies-into-science-instruction/interactive-reading-guides
 
That’s it for this week. Happy Coaching!
 
Want more coaching tips? Check out my book, Differentxiated Mentoring & Coaching in Education: From Preservice Teacher to Expert Practitioner, available from Teachers College Press!  I’m so excited to share it with you! You can use the code: FDNF25 for 15% off. Click  here  and I’ll email you the free Book Group Study Guide that includes questions, prompts, and activities you can use as you share the book with colleagues.  I hope you’ll love this book as much as I loved making it for you!