Recently, I watched a “best practice coaching session” shared by a well-known company on LinkedIn — and honestly, I felt a little embarrassed, frustrated, and deflated.
The coach stood up, took the floor, and began writing on the board. The colleague sat silently — nodding, agreeing, and taking notes.
No curiosity. No nuance. No partnership.
The coach decided the direction, the solutions, even the next steps. Every opportunity to lean out, listen, and collaborate was missed.
Let’s be clear — that’s not coaching. It’s not mentoring. It’s telling, instructing, and controlling — all dressed up as “coaching development.”
If this is what we now call teacher development, we’ve got a serious problem.
Coaching Is Not About Control
There’s a time and place for directive leadership, but let’s stop dragging coaching into something it isn’t.
Even in professional sports — where I’ve worked with Persyou — we know that the best coaching development is collaborative. The moment the coach becomes the only voice in the room, growth stops.
According to the latest Teacher Development Trust CPD report (2025), 39% of respondents said professional development hadn’t clearly improved their ability to perform their job — with a lack of professional agency cited as a key reason.
That’s not a coincidence. Coaching is meant to create agency, spark reflection, and foster discovery — not reinforce hierarchy and control.
What Effective Coaching Actually Looks Like
Research from the Ashridge Centre for Coaching highlights that effective coaching relies on:
- Authenticity
- Rapport
- Alignment of approach to people’s needs
Although only a short clip, all of these elements were missing in that “best practice” video — yet it was being showcased as exemplary.
So why are we still getting this so wrong?
Because in education, “coaching” is often led by people without a strong coaching pedigree. We rely on simple frameworks and scripts — the kind of tools that AI can automate better than we can.
Instructional coaching has blurred the lines, rarely looking outward to the professional coaching industry that’s refined these practices for decades. The result? A lack of nuance, depth, and authenticity.
We need to stop dumbing down, expand coaching capacity and develop new, more effective approaches to peoples practice.
The Illusion of a Quick Fix
We’ve also become enamoured with “quick fixes.” They look neat on paper, sound good to senior leaders, and tick the accountability box.
But what’s actually happening in those conversations? Are teachers feeling developed — or managed? Are we fostering professional growth — or just rebranding control?
The Bottom Line
A genuine coaching and mentoring relationship builds trust, agency, and reflection. It requires real nuance, skill, curiosity, humility, and a willingness to let the other person be part their own growth.
So, let’s ask the question:
Are we are truly developing people in education— or are we just repackaging control as “coaching”?
