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: