“A wide range of activities goes under the broad walkthrough umbrella – some activities supportive of good instruction, other punitive and uninformed. Some focus attention on instruction and bring together educators in ways that lead to improvement; others are technical, compliance-driven, cursory (referred to derisively by teachers as ‘drive-bys’), and harshly evaluative.
Unfortunately, the practice of walkthroughs has become corrupted in many ways by confounding it with supervision and evaluation of teachers. The purpose of some walkthroughs has been to identify deficiencies in classroom practice and to ‘fix’ teachers who manifest those deficiencies. In many instances, judgements about what needs fixing are made on the basis of simplistic checklists that have little or nothing to do with the direct experience of teachers in their classrooms. Groups of administrators descend on classrooms with clipboards and checklists, caucus briefly in the hallway, and then deliver a set of simplistic messages about what needs fixing. This kind of practice is both antithetical to the purposes of instructional rounds and profoundly antiprofessional. The idea behind instructional rounds is that everyone involved is working on their practice, everyone is obliged to be knowledgeable about the common task of instructional improvement, and everyone’s practice should be subject to scrutiny, critique, and improvement.”
A brief book review is here: https://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=11076