Instructional Coaching Conversation Guide

Generate a coaching conversation guide with questions, protocols, and follow-up actions for a teaching focus. Use when preparing for coaching sessions, mentoring, or peer feedback conversations.

What it does

Designs a structured coaching conversation between an instructional coach and a teacher — using Knight's (2007, 2018) partnership approach and the Impact Cycle model — that helps the teacher identify a specific improvement focus, analyse evidence from their practice, and commit to a concrete next step. The critical principle is that effective coaching is a PARTNERSHIP: the coach does not tell the teacher what to do (that's directing) or simply affirm what the teacher already thinks (that's cheerleading). Instead, the coach uses questions, data, and dialogue to help the teacher think more clearly about their practice and make their own decisions about what to change. The output is a conversation plan with specific questions, anticipated responses, dialogue strategies for the coach (pausing, paraphrasing, probing), and clear next steps with accountability. AI is specifically valuable here because designing a coaching conversation requires anticipating the teacher's likely responses, selecting the right questions for the right moment, and balancing challenge with support — a real-time facilitation skill that benefits from advance planning.

The evidence behind it

Knight (2007) established the partnership principles of instructional coaching: equality (the coach and teacher are equal partners), choice (the teacher decides what to work on), voice (the teacher's perspective is central), dialogue (real conversation, not one-way telling), reflection (the teacher examines their own practice), and praxis (learning is applied in the classroom). Knight (2018) operationalised these principles into the Impact Cycle: Identify (what's the current reality and what's the goal?), Learn (what strategy could close the gap?), Improve (implement, monitor, adjust). Kraft, Blazar & Hogan (2018) conducted a meta-analysis of 60 teacher coaching studies and found a pooled effect size of 0.49 standard deviations on instruction quality and 0.18 on student achievement — making coaching one of the most effective forms of professional development. They found that coaching is most effective when it is sustained (not one-off), focused on specific practices (not general), and includes observation and feedback cycles. Costa & Garmston (2016) developed Cognitive Coaching, emphasising that the coach's primary tool is questioning — questions that help teachers become more self-directed, self-monitoring, and self-modifying. Aguilar (2013) added the emotional dimension: effective coaching requires attention to the teacher's emotions, beliefs, and identity — not just their techniques.

Sources

• Knight (2007) — Instructional Coaching: a partnership approach to improving instruction
• Knight (2018) — The Impact Cycle: what instructional coaches should do to foster powerful improvements in teaching
• Kraft, Blazar & Hogan (2018) — The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: a meta-analysis
• Costa & Garmston (2016) — Cognitive Coaching: developing self-directed leaders and learners
• Aguilar (2013) — The Art of Coaching: effective strategies for school transformation

How to use it in your lesson

For the best results with EvidenceLesson, give it:

• coaching_focus — The specific teaching practice or challenge being worked on — what the teacher wants to improve
• teacher_context — Brief context about the teacher — experience level, subject, current situation
• observation_data (optional) — Data from a lesson observation, student work, or video — evidence to ground the conversation
• coaching_phase (optional) — Where in the coaching cycle — initial goal-setting, mid-cycle check-in, or reflection on impact
• relationship_stage (optional) — New coaching relationship, established trust, or challenging dynamic
• teacher_disposition (optional) — The teacher's current stance — eager, resistant, overwhelmed, confident, uncertain
• school_context (optional) — Relevant school features — coaching programme structure, leadership expectations

Known limitations

1. Coaching conversations require trust. The conversation above assumes a willing teacher in a supportive coaching relationship. If the teacher is actively resistant (not just nervous but hostile to coaching), the conversation design must change — trust-building must precede instructional focus. This skill does not address severely resistant coaching dynamics, which require different strategies.

1. Coaching is most effective as part of a sustained cycle. One coaching conversation produces limited change. The meta-analysis by Kraft et al. (2018) found that coaching effects come from sustained cycles of goal-setting, observation, feedback, and adjustment. This conversation plan is one step in what should be an ongoing cycle.

1. The coach needs coaching skills, not just the conversation plan. Reading a script of questions is not the same as facilitating a genuine coaching dialogue. The pausing, paraphrasing, probing, and responsive facilitation described above require practice. Coaches should receive training and, ideally, coaching on their own coaching practice.

Pairs well with