Differentiated Supervision
Premises of differentiated supervision
- Most teachers in education are good
- Teachers know their development needs better than anyone else
- Not all teachers need continuous observation
- Collaboration and professionalism produce creativity and motivation
Four modes of differentiated supervision
| Mode | Who it is for |
|---|---|
| Focused assistance | Specific problem; new or struggling teachers |
| Technical supervision | Most teachers; observation-based |
| Peer coaching | Experienced teachers in collaborative pairs |
| Self-directed | Senior teachers managing their own growth |
Peer coaching process
- Select a partner
- Set goals
- Operationalise goals
- Develop data collection instrument
- Observe
- Share data
- Modify practice
A common mistake in supervision is to treat all teachers the same. The new teacher who needs help with classroom management gets the same kind of supervision as the senior teacher who runs their own development. Differentiated supervision pushes back against this. Different teachers need different kinds of supervision, and matching the mode to the need is part of doing supervision well.
The premises behind the approach
Differentiated supervision rests on four working premises.
There are many good teachers in education
The first premise is that most teachers in education are doing good work. Supervision built on the assumption that everyone needs intensive oversight is wasteful and demoralising.
This is not a soft claim. It does not mean that no teacher needs close attention. It means that the default assumption is competence, and supervision should be calibrated accordingly.
Teachers are the best determiners of their own development needs
The second premise is that teachers know their own development needs better than anyone else. A senior leader watching a teacher once a term sees less of the teacher’s work than the teacher does daily.
This shifts the source of supervision priorities. Instead of the school telling the teacher what to work on, the supervision conversation often starts with what the teacher has already identified as a priority.
Not all teachers need continuous observation
The third premise is that not all teachers benefit from being observed continuously. Some thrive on it; others find it counterproductive. Some are at a stage where observation produces growth; others are at a stage where they need space to consolidate what they have already learned.
A supervision system that observes everyone equally treats teachers as interchangeable units. Differentiated supervision treats them as different professionals at different stages.
Collaboration and professionalism breed creativity
The fourth premise is that collaboration and professionalism, taken seriously, produce creativity and motivation. Supervision that creates collaborative space, instead of one-way oversight, produces better teaching over time.
Together, these four premises lead to a supervision approach that is responsive to who the teacher is, where they are in their development, and what they actually need.
Four modes of differentiated supervision
The approach offers four modes. The right mode depends on the teacher’s stage, situation, and goals.
Focused assistance
Focused assistance is for teachers who have a specific problem to resolve. This might be a new teacher struggling with classroom management. It might be an experienced teacher whose results have dropped suddenly. It might be a teacher dealing with a particular cohort that is not responding to their usual methods.
The mode is intensive and short-term. The supervisor works closely with the teacher to identify the issue, plan a response, and check whether the response works.
Focused assistance is also useful for new teachers who simply need direction. The supervisor in this mode is more directive than in other modes, because the teacher needs concrete guidance rather than open exploration.
The mode is not punishment. It is targeted support. The teacher in focused assistance should know that the support is intended to resolve a specific issue, not to mark them as inadequate.
Technical supervision
Technical supervision is the mode for most teachers most of the time. It is observation-based: the supervisor observes the teacher’s work, collects evidence, and discusses it with the teacher.
The mode is broader than focused assistance. The supervisor is not aimed at one specific problem; they are looking at the teacher’s overall practice, with the teacher’s own goals as part of the agenda.
Most reflective practitioners benefit from regular technical supervision. It provides the outside view that solo reflection cannot, and it produces evidence the teacher can use for their own growth.
Peer coaching
Peer coaching is for experienced teachers who are ready to work in collaborative pairs without senior oversight. Two teachers work together on individual development goals in a non-threatening supervisory model.
The model works because both members are equal partners. There is no hierarchy. The structure is similar to peer mentoring covered earlier, but with a tighter focus on data collection and observation.
Peer coaching is not for everyone. New teachers usually need more directive support. Teachers who do not yet have a peer they trust deeply enough cannot do it. But for experienced teachers in good working relationships, it produces growth that hierarchical supervision cannot match.
Self-directed professional development
The fourth mode is self-directed. Senior teachers who have built up their own development practice manage their own growth. The school provides resources and recognition; the teacher drives the work.
This mode is the destination of the others. A teacher who has worked through focused assistance and technical supervision and built peer coaching relationships is ready, eventually, to direct their own development.
Self-directed does not mean isolated. The senior teacher still has access to colleagues, mentors, and external resources. What changes is the source of priorities. The teacher decides what to work on, why, and how.
How peer coaching works
Peer coaching has a clear process. Following it produces growth; skipping steps produces frustration.
Select a partner
The first step is to find a partner you trust and respect, and who is willing to commit to the work. Peer coaching does not work with a casual partner.
Set goals
Both members set development goals. They do not have to be the same goals. What matters is that each member has something specific they are working on.
Operationalise goals
Translate the goals into observable actions. “Improve questioning” is not operational. “Use three open questions in the first ten minutes of every Tuesday lesson and have the partner record student responses” is.
Develop a data collection instrument
The pair designs a way to collect evidence about the goal. This might be a simple observation form, a count, a video review, or student feedback.
The instrument has to match the goal. A goal about questioning needs a way to capture questions and responses. A goal about pacing needs a way to capture timing.
Observe
The partner observes. The observation focuses on the operational goal, not on everything the teacher does.
Share data
The pair shares the data and discusses what it shows. This is the heart of peer coaching: two professionals examining real evidence about the teacher’s work.
The conversation is collaborative, not evaluative. Both members are working on understanding what the data shows.
Modify practice
Based on the data and discussion, the teacher modifies their practice. The next round of observation tracks whether the modification worked.
The cycle repeats. Over time, the pair builds a deep working relationship and a body of evidence about each member’s growth.
Focused assistance, technical supervision, peer coaching, self-directed professional development
Focused assistance is intensive support for specific problems. Technical supervision is observation-based and works for most teachers. Peer coaching is collaborative work between trusted equals. Self-directed development is for senior teachers who manage their own growth.
Matching the mode to the practitioner
The reflective practitioner can ask which mode they are currently in, which they have outgrown, and which they are ready to move toward.
A teacher early in their career often needs focused assistance for specific issues, with technical supervision in between. As they gain experience, technical supervision becomes the main mode. A teacher who has developed enough to work in trusted pairs moves into peer coaching. A senior teacher with their own practice eventually moves into self-directed development.
The progression is not strictly linear. A senior teacher facing a new challenge may benefit from focused assistance for a term, even though they are normally self-directed. A teacher returning from a long absence may need a return to more structured supervision. The reflective practitioner reads their own situation and chooses the appropriate mode.
A school that offers all four modes, instead of only one, can support a wider range of teachers more effectively. The supervisor’s skill is in matching the mode to the practitioner, not in applying a single mode to everyone.