I was recently asked to consult with a team organizing the plan for implementation of a new instructional program across a statewide setting. They are considering the role of instructional coaching and whether that support should be provided by staff within each school or by district or regional personnel. A long history of efforts to change instructional practice reminds us how complex it is to embed real change that leads to improved student learning.
In my initial conversation, I presented three areas for consideration:
- Coaching Support following quality technical training in the program’s instructional practice
- Developing a coaching culture among the teachers implementing the program and instructional coaches and administrators
- Respectful approach to the need for program fidelity
“Discovering what works does not solve the problem of program effectiveness. Once models and best practices are identified, practitioners are faced with the challenge of implementing programs properly. A poorly implemented program can lead to failure as easily as a poorly designed one.” (Successful Program Implementation: Lessons From Blueprints)
Coaching Support
Decades ago, Bruce Joyce and Beverly Showers demonstrated that teachers rarely transfer new learning into classroom practice without coaching. Recent research on practice-based teacher education and professional learning also echoes Joyce and Showers. Research on how professionals learn complex practices—across fields such as teaching, medicine, and engineering—points to several key elements:
- Knowledge (the why behind the practice)
- Modelling of the practice
- Opportunity to practice and receive feedback
- Iterative improvement
Quality coaching provides exactly this cycle. Without it, teachers often revert to familiar routines, even when they intellectually agree with new instructional approaches.
More recent research strongly reinforces the role of coaching in transferring professional learning into classroom practice. A meta-analysis of instructional coaching practices by Matthew Kraft, David Blazar, and Dylan Hogan concluded that “teacher coaching programs have a large positive effect on instructional practice and a smaller but significant effect on student achievement.” They identified that professional learning does not translate into classroom change simply because teachers attended training. Coaching provides the structure for teachers to apply new strategies, receive feedback, and refine their practice while working with students. Coaching is a key element of the implementation infrastructure that helps move a program from training sessions into consistent classroom practice.
Coaching Culture
As leaders consider how coaching will support program implementation, an equally important question emerges: How will coaching be experienced within the school community? If coaching is viewed only as a service delivered by a designated coach or external expert, its impact may remain limited. Even more problematic is the coaching support being perceived as another layer of supervision—something connected to monitoring compliance with the program, or contributing to evaluation. When that perception develops, teachers may protect their practice rather than openly explore it. When leaders intentionally cultivate a culture where teachers, coaches, and administrators engage together in examining practice, sharing feedback, and supporting experimentation, coaching becomes something quite different. In these environments, coaching moves from being seen as supervision to becoming part of the professional culture that sustains learning and continuous improvement.
Developing teacher-to-teacher peer coaching can build the coaching culture and individual teacher coachability. When teachers engage as partners in observing instruction, exploring new strategies, and reflecting on student learning, coaching shifts from being something delivered only by a specialist to a shared professional practice. Peer coaching reduces the perception of supervision because the focus is not on evaluation but on learning together. As teachers observe colleagues, ask questions about instructional decisions, and reflect on the impact on students, the habits of coaching—curiosity, feedback, and experimentation—can spread across the faculty. In this way, individual coaching support around a new program can become the catalyst for a broader coaching culture in which educators regularly learn with and from one another while strengthening program implementation. Peer coaching can set the stage for respectful fidelity because teachers are no longer implementing the program alone—they are examining its impact together and learning from one another’s experiences.
“I suspect that an overemphasis on fidelity likely leads to low quality instruction where teachers do every task on a checklist but do not teach with passion, or love, or even in a manner that involves reflection. At worst, too much focus on fidelity can lead teachers to feel like they’re working on an assembly line putting widgets together rather than engaging in the complex, important art of inspiring and educating tomorrow’s leaders.”
(Jim Knight)
Respectful Fidelity
When we introduce a new curriculum program, we are asking teachers to join us in being vulnerable. A request to implement, question, observe, and report out along the way invites teachers to become members of a team focused on maximizing students’ success. The word fidelity fits naturally into this conversation about vulnerability. For evidence from teachers’ observations, student engagement, and learning assessments to build systemic understanding, fidelity of implementation is critical.
The implementation of new curricula and/or instructional strategies should create an opportunity for increased team building across a school system. Fidelity is important, but it is unlikely to be built through supervision. When teachers partner with curriculum supervisors, instructional coaches, building and district administrators, and teaching colleagues—each sharing some element of vulnerability—a continuous learning community can emerge that serves students.
Training may introduce the program, but coaching, collaboration, and shared responsibility determine whether it becomes part of everyday teaching.
Successful program implementation rarely depends only on the quality of the program itself. It depends on the professional culture surrounding its use. When coaching support, peer coaching culture, and respectful fidelity come together, educators are no longer simply implementing a program—they are collectively learning how to improve student learning.
Programs are implemented by people, not systems.
