By Dr. Jimmy D. Shaw Jr.
A teacher can leave orientation with a badge, a laptop, a mentor’s name, and a genuine sense of welcome. Then October comes.
The classroom routines that sounded simple in July are not working quite as planned. The teacher has questions, the mentor has a full classroom of their own, and the people who were so visible at the beginning of the year are harder to find.
That is when our support system tells the truth about itself.
In my work as a superintendent and a pastor, I have learned to pay attention to what happens after the meeting. We can explain the vision well and still leave people uncertain about how to carry it out. We can tell people they matter without building a dependable way to notice when they need help.
They need to see us. But being seen is only the beginning.
Presence needs a plan
Consider a hypothetical first-year teacher who is struggling with classroom transitions. A mentor has been assigned, and the teacher has asked for help. There has been a written response, but no one has come alongside the teacher to see what is happening.
We could send another resource. We could remind the mentor of the assignment. We could add another observation.
Before we do any of that, we need to ask a harder question. Who owns the response to this teacher, and when will the teacher see that response become action?
A principal check-in can reopen the conversation. A coach can observe the transition, help identify one manageable next step, and model it. The teacher can practice it. Before anyone leaves, they can agree on when to return and what they will look for.
The next visit is not simply a check that the teacher followed directions. Did students understand what to do? Could they get started? What still needs to change? What does the teacher see that we missed?
Now we have something to work on together.
A mentor’s name on a roster does not answer those questions. Neither does an encouraging email. Those things can help, but we cannot confuse assigning support with delivering it.
More help is not always better help
There is another way our good intentions can get in the way.
Imagine that same teacher receiving one next step from a mentor, another from a content specialist, another from an instructional coach, and another from an administrator. Each person may have something useful to offer. Together, they may leave the teacher wondering what to do first.
That is a leadership problem.
We need to be around, but our presence needs to be systemic. We do not need to drown people in support or leave them thirsty for it. There has to be a progression.
The principal or designated leader has to help coordinate that progression. What is the most important need right now? Who is best positioned to help? What can wait? How will the people supporting this teacher know what the others are doing?
Clarity is not another document handed to the teacher. It is a shared understanding of the next right action.
Keep the circle alive
This is where CRT-CM becomes practical.
Clarity means we can describe the practice we want to see and why it matters for students. Resources mean the teacher has the time, materials, and people needed to work on it. Training means we do more than explain the expectation. We model it and make room to practice.
Coaching and monitoring keep that work alive.
Monitoring gives us evidence of what is happening. Coaching helps us decide what to do with that evidence. If we observe without helping, we may leave people feeling judged. If we encourage without looking closely at the work, our advice may miss the need.
The two belong together. We come back to learn whether our support was useful, not just whether our direction was followed.
And we should not reserve this attention for first-year teachers. The strong teacher who rarely asks for anything still deserves a conversation. Competence should not make someone invisible to leadership.
Look for the receipts
At your next leadership team meeting, choose one part of your teacher-support system and follow it all the way through.
Who was supposed to receive support?
Who was responsible for providing it?
When did the conversation or visit happen?
What action followed?
When did someone return?
Keep the focus on the work, not on collecting private details about people. A calendar entry, an agreed action, and a follow-up conversation can tell us more than another broad statement about how much we value our staff.
If we cannot answer those questions, we have found something to improve.
I explore this connection between clarity, support, and follow-through in Seeking a Learning University: Turning Meetings into Movements Using the CRT-CM Model. The framework is meant to help leaders turn the commitments we make in meetings into practices people can actually experience.
For this week, start with one person and one return visit.
Who needs to see you, and what will be different because you came back?
