Tiering Without Tears: A Simple Way to Decide Who Gets Coached on What

Shannon Streett,

Chief of Staff & Development

September 11, 2026

Learn how to tier instructional coaching without overcomplicating the process. This guide shows school leaders how to use baseline walkthrough data and one simple diagnostic question to determine whether teachers need coaching on foundational Priority Skills or support tied to the Principal’s Instructional Goal. It also explains how to identify team-wide patterns, use collaborative planning strategically, and reassess coaching needs as teachers grow.

Edu20/20 Insights: Tiering Without Tears: A Simple Way to Decide Who Gets Coached on What, by Shannon Streett, September 11, 2026

When school leaders have very clear instructional goals, every teacher can benefit from coaching toward those goals. But not the same coaching.

One-size-fits-all coaching either wastes time on teachers who are ready to level up or overwhelms teachers who are still building the basics. So how do we decide who gets coached on what? (In addition to all the other things instructional leaders do?)

You don’t need a complicated plan for every teacher. You just need one question, asked consistently: What is getting in the way of learning the most? This question can help you identify one of two pathways to tailor coaching for teachers and can manage the sorting for you.

The Tiering Decision Tree

Based on your collected observation data (we recommend 2 baseline walk-through observations), teachers will fall into one of two categories: Priority Skills or the Principal’s Instructional Goal track.

Tiering decision tree: Ask what is getting in the way of learning the most. If there is a gap in a Priority Skill, use the Priority Skills Track. If not, use the Principal’s Instructional Goal Track. In either track, check for a team-wide pattern. — Use the Tiering Decision Tree to identify the right coaching pathway based on what is getting in the way of learning most.

What are Priority Skills?

According to coaching expert Jill Jackson, Priority Skills are the foundational skills that all teachers need to provide strong instruction for students: Classroom Management, Behavior Management, Student Engagement, Lesson Planning, and Delivery of a Basic lesson. Often when something is getting in the way of student learning, the gap can be traced back to a missing or weak Priority Skill. Let’s look at a quick example of what that might look like in the classroom:

Classroom Example: Ms. Ortiz is a 5th grade teacher. Baseline walkthrough data shows that she has strong classroom and behavior management, but students start to disengage about 15 minutes into every lesson.

In this example, Ms. Ortiz fits in the Priority Skills track since the gap can be traced back to the Priority Skill of Student Engagement. Disengagement is what was getting in the way of learning the most. The goal of the Priority Skills track is to level up instruction quickly (and move toward the Principal’s Instructional Goal track), so let’s examine what it could look like if Ms. Ortiz is coached right at her level of need:

Coaching Example: After a coaching debrief and some collaborative brainstorming, Ms. Ortiz added a turn-and-talk checkpoint at least every 8 minutes, in line with the rule of thumb of never talking more than 7-8 minutes without giving students a chance to process content or move.

Turn and talks are definitely not a magical fix-all for student engagement issues, but this planning move will allow Ms. Ortiz to practice and get comfortable with turning some of the work over to students while freeing her up to check for student understanding. Then, as she’s ready, she can try different engagement strategies to continue improving her instructional delivery.

The Principal’s Instructional Goal Track

Teachers who have a really strong foundation in Priority Skills are ready to be coached and supported in moving student data toward targeted goals. (We call them the Principal’s Instructional Goal, some call them school improvement goals. You get the idea!) Since these teachers don’t have one shared answer the way baselines give the Priority Skills track, it’s helpful to use three lenses to identify how each teacher specifically needs to be coached:

- What do baseline walkthroughs show?
- What does student work show?
- What are teachers reporting as their biggest pain points?

Another classroom example here can best illustrate what this can look like:

Classroom Example: Mr. Jordan is a veteran teacher with strong foundational skills, and the Principal’s Instructional goal is improving reading comprehension scores by the spring benchmark. Baselines walk-throughs show that Mr. Jordan is two weeks behind on the pacing guide. Mr. Jordan flags “many students not reading at grade level and not completing outside-of-class assigned reading” as a pain point.

Note that our example here shows two important lenses– data from the baseline walks and Mr. Jordan’s qualitative data, or his reported pain points. So what can differentiated coaching look like for him? Let’s check out one possibility.

Coaching Example: Mr. Jordan and his instructional coach decide to try balancing the number of teacher read-alouds with opportunities for students to partner or independently read during class. They also look at lessons to identify moments to monitor comprehension during reading.

In these examples, coaching is differentiated for the teacher’s exact skill need while supporting instructional decisions that will help reach the Principal’s Instructional goal.

When It’s a Team Pattern

Sometimes the tiering process reveals a pattern bigger than just one teacher. It’s possible that an entire grade level or content team shares the same skill gap in instruction. Lesson planning is a common example. So what then?

This is prime time to use collaborative planning time as a coaching structure instead of or alongside individual coaching cycles. (We call this working smarter, not harder!) Whether this replaces or supplements individual coaching all depends on the coach’s bandwidth. There’s no single right answer. Here’s an illustration:

Team Example: The coach notices everyone on Mr. Jordan’s ELA team is struggling with the same pacing issue. Rather than running four 1:1 cycles, the coach decides to use collaborative planning to coach the moves. The team meets once per week to identify the most important parts of the text, where the teacher needs to read aloud, and where students should partner or independently read. The team identifies critical moments to monitor comprehension, and they bring student results back to the next meeting to discuss and adjust plans.

Tiering Isn’t Permanent

One critical caveat to this tiering process is that it isn’t a one-time sort. Coached skills should be reassessed every coaching cycle, and a teacher’s track should be shifting as they grow. Tiering should be a growth decision, not a permanent label. Most importantly, teachers should be able to see evidence of their own growth as well as the impact on student learning.

Ready to try this with your own roster? Download the free Tiering Decision Tree Coaching Guide. It walks you through the same decision tree, plus a worksheet to sort your teachers in real time.

If this gives you a clearer way to sort coaching needs, the next step is building the skill to coach through them. Our Instructional Coaching Institute helps coaches and leaders strengthen the conversations, decision-making, and practical coaching skills that turn that logic into action. Whether you’re attending individually, bringing the training to your district, or joining us virtually, you can explore the Instructional Coaching Institute and find the option that fits your team.