When Compliance Poses as Support, Math Agency Erodes
- Phonisha Hawkins
- Aug 15
- 2 min read
A month ago, I authored a post on LinkedIn where I shared my thoughts on how we can often confuse support with control.
A pacing guide and a walkthrough form are not support.
They are pressure dressed up as structure. A culture of control often does not feel harmful in the moment when created, but it is one of the most powerful ways to erode teacher efficacy over time.
When the checklist replaces teacher voice and if it is upheld as the standard, it will ultimately diminish the integrity of what our purpose is in the classroom, which is to educate our children. There have been times when I am in planning sessions with teachers and they pull out their lists and get to checking because that walkthrough form, which has been upheld as the teacher bible, determines the evaluation rating at the end of the year. In return, the integrity of the standard that is being communicated to kids becomes lost in what leaders want.
Let’s not confuse the walkthrough form as the demon. It is not. The walkthrough form serves to ensure pedagogical practices are present that can help support high priority Tier 1 instruction. But when “Does the word wall match the content?” becomes the focus rather than student thinking, the natural flow of learning gets overshadowed and that directly impacts teacher efficacy.
Support builds capacity. Pressure breaks it down.
Are there certain criteria we need to identify and ensure are embedded in our instruction? Yes, without a doubt. But the absence of teacher voice in a controlled space sends the message that equity and expertise are not valued unless only the leader is displaying them. Teachers will stop aiming for student learning and become more adaptable to leader approval.
Over time, the belief teachers have in their own ability weakens because they know they will not be heard. Efficacy drops with control and, with it, student outcomes.
“What is the standard asking students to do?” Leaders will collaborate in the work with their team.
“What is the math focus of the task?” Leaders support conceptualization and multiple entry points for math because all our babies do not learn the same way.
“Do you feel ready to teach this next week?” Leaders give them whatever they need so they are fully prepared.
Leaders: If your support vanished tomorrow, would your teachers feel more equipped or less? Sit in that for a second and you will have your answer.
Teachers: If the checklist disappeared tomorrow, are you ready to teach or would you need someone to tell you what to do?
The support of leaders must match the assignment we charge our math teachers with. Part of effective leadership is partnering with teachers to cultivate their efficacy, so the work can thrive without a checklist.
Next Up! Using HQIM Without Losing Yourself
Please leave a comment and sign up for post notifications on the homepage! Thank you for taking a piece of time from your life to support me!
This is so spot on. Beautifully said support brings capacity and pressure breaks. If support is provided accurately teachers will feel appreciated and confident in their pedagogy. Scope and sequence should not detour a teacher from doing what's best for teaching and learning. If leaders coach teachers correctly they understand pivots in the best interest of students. Planning with the end in mind is career and college ready not Exit ticket ready. In the words of Allen Iverson "we are talking about practice."
The two questions at the end...solid! For leaders, would a teacher feel more or less equipped if you were not there...that should be the driving force behind every Instructional Leader's work!!!
“When the checklist replaces teacher voice and if it is upheld as the standard, it will ultimately diminish the integrity of what our purpose is in the classroom, which is to educate our children.”
When will we let go of antiquated practices and replace them with more innovative and effective ways to help EVERYONE grow- including teachers?
“Support builds capacity. Pressure breaks it down.” That line says it all. It captures how tools meant to help can actually limit teacher agency when driven by compliance. When pressure replaces trust, professional judgment suffers.
This post is a powerful reminder to rethink what true support looks like in math education. Thank you for naming the issue so clearly and urging us to protect math agency.
This post is a beautiful blend of clarity, empathy, and conviction. It feels like a gentle nudge for leaders everywhere to reflect: is our support truly empowering, or is it unintentionally silencing? Phonisha’s words offer both challenge and solace—and most importantly, a vision for more authentic, agency-affirming leadership in our classrooms.