Meaning of supervision and my professional life Essay

Instructional Supervision Instructional supervision is a very important concept which must be understood by all educators for the sake of achieving their teaching objectives. For this case, the process of instructional supervision must be applied for the sake of delivering effective instructions to the students. Supervision of instruction for example in England began as an external inspection where some people were appointed to go around the school to observe what the students were learning and what the teachers were teaching the students. The main aim of these supervisors was to ensure that the set curriculum was being followed and the students were actually being taught. On the other hand, in United States, supervision began in 1830’s after the formation of common schools. Initially, supervision in schools was undertaken by superintendents after the formation of city school system due to increased population in major cities. Later on, the role of supervision by superintendents became impossible as the number of schools increased. The role of supervision had to be delegated to the principal to oversee that the teachers we following the curriculum in their teaching. In order to promote growth of teachers and recognizing practice of supervisors time restrain, Sergiovanni and Starratt (1998), suggested that a supervisory system be created that would contain a number of processes of supervision even summative evaluation. The system was not to involve direct formal supervision every year for every teacher. This system was to evaluate the teachers within a period of three to five years. In this kind of evaluation, the teachers were to receive a variety of evaluation during the three or five years and finally be evaluated formally only once. Professional growth evidence is required during once-a-cycle formal evaluation. The work of supervision was also attempted to be opened at international involvement by Sergiovanni and Starratt. In a school setting, the principal has the overall responsibility of supervision of the whole school. For this case, he supervises, teachers, students and all the other staff working in the school that include: librarian, gardeners, drivers, cleaners etc. The supervision role is not an easy task especially of teachers and for this case, the principal has to carry out the exercise with intelligent and diplomacy. The teachers of course knows their role and they would feel not motivate if they see they are being supervised like factory workers. This would in turn kill their morale at work and finally they would not deliver the required knowledge to the students and the end result would mean that the teaching objectives will not be achieved. The principal on the other hand has a responsibility of supervising the work of the students and together with their behaviors. Students tend to acquire deviant behaviors from other students like smoking and unless this behavior is corrected at an early stage, the student will not concentrate in his learning. In some situation, the supervision of students gets out of hand as they tend to have acquired more serious behaviors such as carrying of weapons and may be killing of their fellow students. For this case, this becomes criminal offence and is not likely to be handled the principal. Principal should be very strict when it comes to discipline for the sake of ensuring that education objectives are achieved. Since the students are in a crucial stage of adolescent stage where influence of behavior is at high level hence their behaviors should supervised keenly. According to Glickman (1990), there are a number of supervisory approaches within clinical supervision structure. He developed a supervision model that provides theoretical framework that with four supervision approaches that would be found in supervision concept. These approaches are similar in the intended end goal but they differ differs slightly in the power and control that is accorded to the teacher. The four approaches are a follow: The first supervision approach is the nondirective supervision whereby the teacher has the freedom of formulating his own plan on the future development. In such a situation, the supervisor is there to give advice to the teacher when he comes up with his own ideas on the way forward. This kind of approach indeed motivates the teaching staff members as they feel they are in control with their undertakings. For this case it should be encourage at situations where the teachers are experienced in their work and they can work with little or no supervision. (Glickman, 1990) The other supervision approach is collaborative supervision. In this approach, the teacher and the supervisor do share idea before the supervisor makes decision on whatever decision he wants to make. This approach too is a good one also as the teachers feels motivated as they are consulted before any decision can be arrived at. For this case, the teachers contribute their ideas and the supervisor weighs various options before settling on the best idea that has been contributed by the teachers. By merely brainstorming of ideas, the approach is of much help for the sake of choosing the best approach to be used. For this case, this kind of approach should be encouraged at situation where teachers involved are experienced in their work. The third supervision approach is the directive informational approach. In this situation, the supervisor formulates the supervisor plan and it is the responsibility of the teacher to decide if he is going to follow the plan. In this kind of an approach, the teachers are not motivated with it as they feel they are not consulted before a decision is being made in their work. Although some of the approach since it consumes less time before it is formulated, majority of them especially the experienced ones feels that some ideas which are better are overlooked. In this kind of approach, the teachers are given an opportunity to follow or not to follow the approach directives. However, the approach is appropriate mostly to teacher who are not experienced or the novice teachers. Lastly is the directive control approach in which the teacher formulates the supervisory plan and expects are the teacher to follow it. For this case, the teachers have no alternative on whether to have another idea. They have to follow the supervisory plan that has been formulated by their supervisor. This approach however does not motivate the teachers as they are not given an opportunity to contribute their ideas toward formulation of a supervisory plan. For this case, they have to follow the directives as formulated by their supervisor. This approach is popular where the teachers being supervised are less experiences of novice. It is also very appropriate in situations whereby there is not time to gather in a meeting and brainstorm on the way forward as far as supervisory plan is concerned. Before the supervisor can know on which approach he should use, he should consider knowledge and experience of the teachers concerned before settling on the supervisory approach plan to use. The issue of responsibility and accountability should also be looked into in order to decide on the approach to use for the sake of at least motivate the teacher in their work. Motivation is the inner drive to do something, and unless the teachers have that inner drive to deliver knowledge to their students, teaching objectives might never be achieved Glickman (1990) asserts that collaborative approach is very popular among the teachers and they really enjoy their work if used. For this case, school principal should at least ensure they use this kind of an approach when they are formulating their supervisory plan to be applied in their school. There are three supervisor responsibilities that should be considered in the supervision process. They include: ? The Supervisor to carry our observations to both the teachers and students. ? The supervisor to give guidance and support to teachers and students. ? Lastly is for the supervisor to give feedback to the teachers. According to Knoll (1987), the information that a supervisor gather after carrying out a classroom observation is very important. He is able to have an access to a wide range of skills necessary for teaching which he can in turn share it with other teachers. The main aim of carrying out a classroom observation is to collect data that is necessary for carrying out an evaluative rating which is accurate. As far as supervision is concerned, guidance and support should be the main idea of supervision in the first place. Supervision is not done just to see whether teachers are following the curriculum or not and then note that one down, no. One should continuously offer guidance and support as he supervises. For this case, the supervisors are urged to make correction on the spot while carrying out their supervision roles in order for them to achieve their objectives. In order for teachers to improve on their areas of teaching, the supervisor must ensure that he gives feedback to them on the areas he has observed that would like to be improved. There would be no need of supervision if the teachers are not given the feedback as it is this feedback that they will know what areas they need to improve in while carrying out their duties. There is very big difference between evaluation and supervision though the two terms interrelates. Evaluation is the art of making judgment about the performance of a teacher. On the other hand, supervision is mere the art of ensuring that the teachers are following the laid down rules and regulation in their work. Evaluation comes after one has carried out an observation on the teachers. Appendix Literature Review Instructional supervision improves teaching performance if it is carried out in the manner that is desired by teacher. If the collaborative supervision approach is used according to Knoll (1987) is used, the teachers will be motivated in their work and the overall performance of the school will be felt. In his book – Supervision for better instruction: Practical techniques for improving staff performance, Knoll (1987) asserts that teachers are motivated in their work of teaching when collaborative supervisory plan approach is applied in their supervision. Pfeiffer and Dunlap (1982) in their book – Supervision of teachers: A guide to improving instruction asserts that teachers need to be motivated in their work for the sake of achieving their teaching objectives. Motivation can only be achieved if the supervisors uses collaborative supervisory plan in their work. On the other hand, Rettig (2000) in his journal – Leslie’s lament: How can I make teachers’ supervision meaningful? – asserts that unless guidance and support is given to teacher, there is no need of supervision in the first place. He further states that teachers should be given a feedback after they have been successfully evaluated by their supervisor in order for them to improve in their teaching. He concludes that teachers’ supervision will be meaningful after the guidance, support and feedback is given to teachers by their supervisors. References Bourisaw, D. M. (1988): Anticipatory set bias: Effects on teacher observation in Evaluation: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames Glickman, C. D. (1990): Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach, 2nd Edn: Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Knoll, M. K. (1987): Supervision for better instruction: Practical techniques for Improving staff performance: Englewood Clif, NJ: Prentice Hall. Odell, S. J. (1986): Induction support of new teachers: A functional approach. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 26-29 Pfeiffer, I. L. , & Dunlap, J. B. (1982): Supervision of teachers: A guide to improving instruction: Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press. Rettig, P. R. (2000): Leslie’s lament: How can I make teachers’ supervision meaningful? Educational Horizons, 79(1), 33-37. Sergiovanni, T. J. (1982): â€Å"Toward a Theory of Supervisory Practice: Integrating the Scientific, Clinical, and Artistic Views. † In Supervision of Teaching, ed. Thomas J. Sergiovanni. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development Sergiovanni, T. J. and Starratt, R. J. (1998): Supervision: A Redefinition, 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. Shantz, D. , & Ward, T. (2000): Feedback, conservation and power in the field experience of preservice teachers. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27 (4), 288-294.