Professional Learning  ›  Leadership & Coaching  ›  Workshops  ›  A Coaching Menu of Services
a ready-to-run workshopA Coaching Menu of Services
Leadership & Coaching · Workshop

A Coaching Menu of Services (Workshop)

Everything you need to lead this with your staff or PLC: a minute-by-minute run-of-show, what to say, what to hand out, and how to make it stick. Pick the length that fits your slot.

Key takeaway

Many teachers underuse coaching simply because they do not know what a coach can do or quietly assume it means being fixed or judged, and a concrete menu of services, from co-planning to modeling to observing a specific question, makes coaching legible and choosable, which both demystifies it and puts the teacher in the driver seat.

Format
PLC / team meeting
Length
45 minutes
Group size
Any (works 4-40)
Who can run it
Any coach or coaching lead
You will need
Slides (5)Printed handoutYour current coaching offerA timer
Aligned to
Learning Forward: Learning CommunitiesInTASC 10: Leadership & CollaborationResearch on coaching models and teacher uptake
Share / assign

Why it works

A surprising amount of coaching goes unused for a reason that has nothing to do with the quality of the coach: teachers do not actually know what coaching is or what a coach can do for them, and in the absence of that knowledge they fill the gap with the least flattering assumption, that coaching is remedial, that it is for struggling teachers, or that it is a soft form of evaluation. A teacher who thinks coaching means being watched and judged, or being told they need fixing, will understandably avoid it, and a teacher who simply has no clear picture of what a coach offers has no reason to seek one out. A coaching menu of services directly addresses this by making coaching concrete, legible, and choosable. Instead of coaching being a vague, slightly threatening thing that happens to teachers, it becomes a set of specific, named services that a teacher can understand and select from according to their own goals, which both demystifies coaching and, crucially, puts the teacher in the position of choosing support rather than having it imposed. The menu typically spans a range of services that vary in intensity and in who holds the focus. Lighter, teacher-directed services include co-planning a lesson or unit, thinking through a problem of practice together, finding and adapting resources, or helping analyze student work, none of which involves anyone observing the teacher and all of which are clearly in service of the teacher's own goals. Modeling services include the coach teaching a demonstration lesson, co-teaching, or the teacher observing the coach or a colleague, which put the coach, not the teacher, in the observed role. Observation-based services, where the coach watches the teacher, are framed explicitly as the teacher inviting the coach to look at a specific question the teacher cares about (how is my questioning distributed, are my transitions working), not as the coach coming to evaluate, which keeps the teacher in control of the focus. And goal-oriented cycles pull several of these together around a teacher's chosen objective over time. Presenting these as a menu accomplishes several things at once. It educates teachers about the actual range of what coaching can be, dissolving the narrow and threatening assumptions. It signals that coaching is a resource for all teachers pursuing growth, not an intervention for strugglers. It gives teachers agency, letting them enter coaching through whatever door feels safe and useful, often a low-risk service like co-planning, and build trust before anything more exposing. And it makes the coach's offer explicit and consistent rather than idiosyncratic. A few cautions keep the menu honest: it has to be backed by a coaching relationship and culture of trust, or the menu is just a list; the services must genuinely be non-evaluative and the teacher genuinely in control, or teachers will see through it; and the menu is a starting structure, not a rigid constraint, since real coaching flexes to the teacher. The workshop helps coaches and coaching leads build a clear, trust-grounded menu of services that demystifies coaching, signals it is for everyone, and puts teachers in the driver seat of their own support.

The research: Research and practice on coaching models, service menus, and teacher uptake of coaching.

The run-of-show

Choose your slot. The agenda, timings, and length update to match.

    The core activity: make coaching concrete and choosable

    The heart of the session is building a clear menu of coaching services that demystifies coaching, signals it is for everyone, and puts teachers in control of their support.

    A menu puts the teacher in the driver seatTeachers avoid coaching they cannot picture or quietly assume is judgment. A concrete menu of services, from co-planning to teacher-invited observation, makes coaching legible, signals it is for everyone, and lets teachers choose their own support.

    Facilitator notes

    The menu needs trust behind itA service menu demystifies coaching only if the services are genuinely non-evaluative and the teacher genuinely in control. Without a coaching relationship and culture behind it, the menu is a list teachers will see through.

    Adapt it

    Participant handout

    One page for every teacher. Print it, or save it as a PDF.

    K12 Academics · Professional Learning

    A Coaching Menu of Services: legible, for everyone, chosen

    Make coaching concrete and choosable: offer a clear menu of services across intensities, grounded in trust, so teachers understand what a coach can do and choose their own support.

    1. A low-risk, teacher-directed service for my menu:
    2. A modeling service (where I am the one observed):
    3. How I frame observation as teacher-invited, not evaluative:
    4. How the menu signals coaching is for all teachers, not strugglers:
    5. The safe entry door I will offer first:

    Make it stick

    A menu demystifies coaching and gives teachers agency. Close by setting the follow-up:

    Common questions

    Doesn't a menu make coaching feel transactional rather than relational?
    It feels that way only if you mistake the menu for the whole of coaching, when it is really just the on-ramp to a relationship. A menu does not replace the coaching relationship; it makes the relationship accessible to teachers who otherwise would not know how to enter it or would avoid it out of misunderstanding. The transactional appearance, here are services, choose one, is the point at the start, because it gives a wary teacher a concrete, low-stakes, legible way to begin, often with something safe like co-planning, where trust can build. Once the relationship is established, coaching flexes well beyond any menu and becomes exactly the relational, responsive work it should be. So the menu is scaffolding, not a cage: it demystifies coaching and lowers the barrier to starting, and then the actual coaching that follows is as relational as ever. The error would be treating the menu as a rigid catalog that constrains what coaching can be, rather than as a clear invitation that gets teachers through the door into a relationship. Used as the latter, a menu makes coaching more relational overall, because it brings in teachers who would otherwise never have started.
    If teachers choose their own services, won't they just avoid the hard growth they actually need?
    Some might initially choose comfortable services, but that is usually the right starting point rather than a problem, because coaching that teachers avoid entirely produces no growth at all, hard or easy. The agency the menu gives is what gets reluctant teachers in the door, and most meaningful growth in coaching depends on a relationship of trust that cannot exist if the teacher never engages. A teacher who starts with low-risk co-planning and has a genuinely useful, non-threatening experience builds the trust that later makes them willing to invite you to observe a real challenge in their practice, whereas a teacher pushed straight into exposing observation often disengages. So letting teachers choose, especially at first, is not conceding their growth; it is the path to it. That said, the menu operates within a coaching relationship, and a skilled coach does not simply take orders: once trust exists, the coach surfaces the harder growth through the relationship, helps the teacher set goals that stretch them, and guides the choice of services toward what will actually move their practice. The menu gives teachers agency over how they enter and engage; it does not mean the coach abandons their role in helping teachers see and pursue the growth that matters. Agency and challenge coexist, with agency first.
    What if teachers only pick the services that don't involve being observed?
    That is common, especially early, and it is fine as a starting point, because the teacher-directed services are genuinely valuable and they build the trust that makes observation possible later. If teachers gravitate to co-planning, thinking through problems, resource-finding, and student-work analysis while steering clear of being observed, you are still doing real coaching that helps their practice, and you are accumulating the relationship capital that is the actual prerequisite for the more exposing work. Observation feels risky because being watched teaching is genuinely vulnerable, so it makes sense that teachers approach it only once they trust you, and the menu's job is to let them build that trust through safer services first. Over time, several things move teachers toward observation: the trust built through the lighter services, the way you frame observation as them inviting you to look at a specific question they care about rather than you evaluating them, modeling services where you are the one observed first, and seeing colleagues have positive observation experiences. So you do not force observation; you make the non-observed services excellent, keep observation framed as safe and teacher-controlled, and let teachers move toward it as trust grows. Many eventually do, precisely because they were allowed to start where they felt safe.

    Go deeper

    Build it into a bigger day

    Workshop
    Building the Coaching Relationship
    Workshop
    Instructional Coaching Cycles
    Workshop
    Coaching Resistant Teachers