Teacher Supervising

The supervision of teachers has been a consistent expectation in schools across the country. The methods used and the goals achieved through supervision vary widely, including increasing teacher quality and autonomy, and improving professional development and school culture. Methods used by administrators in supervising teachers include observation, action research, walk-throughs, and various group development approaches. Effective supervision has the power to improve student outcomes, as well as improve other issues such as teacher retention and reducing teacher burnout.

Keywords Action Research; Clinical Supervision; Observation; Group Development; Instructional Leadership; Professional Development; Supervision; Teacher Autonomy; Teacher Quality; Teacher Supervision; Walk Through

Overview

The methods and policies used by administrators supervising teachers in schools vary widely, from the reasons why teachers are supervised, to the methods and policies that are used for supervision. The most basic reason for teacher supervising is to ensure the success of a school. School success criteria in the United States are not universally agreed upon; individual schools and districts define success in different ways, and engage in various methods to achieve their goals (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004).

In the early history of American education, supervision of teachers was mostly performed by local authorities, and teachers often had a large amount of autonomy over their schools. In the late 19th century, schools became much more organized due to a call for education to meet the demands of a newly industrialized nation. By the end of the 19th century, one role of the superintendent encompassed teacher supervision. At this time, those who were in the teaching profession were largely seen as unskilled and needing someone to watch over them to ensure they did not fail (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

At the beginning of the 20th century, schools began to employ the use of individuals they called "special supervisors" to assist teachers in their lessons and subjects. A "general supervisor," the precursor to today's assistant principal or vice-principal, performed administrative duties and also helped evaluate teachers by collecting data during supervisory tasks (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

Goals for Teacher Supervision

The goals of supervising teachers have changed. Today's educational goals largely revolve around the improvement of teaching in order to improve student outcomes. The research and literature on teacher supervision today largely focuses on how to help teachers develop professionally, as well as solve problems and issues in the classroom and the school. Educational success in the United States today is increasingly measured through high-stakes testing, and students are expected to be on par with certain standards. Researchers largely agree that teacher quality is the foremost indicator of student success, regardless of other barriers (Darling-Hammond, 1998). Therefore, improving the quality of teaching is one of the foremost steps to help students from all backgrounds succeed. Furthermore, teacher accountability is seen as increasingly important, especially for schools that are failing to meet requirements for improvement. Schools may have differing mission statements or methods; however, teacher supervision occurs throughout most schools and teachers have some accountability in carrying out the learning goals of the institution, while also improving their skills as instructors.

Successful and valuable supervision today is usually charged with the task of helping teachers increase their effectiveness in instruction, and ensuring that all teachers are aligned in their instructional methods in meeting the school's goals, rather than finding fault. Research has shown that effective supervision in schools is crucial to other elements contributing to learning, including professional development, classroom management, and curriculum and instruction, and that effective supervision of teachers can help raise the academic outcomes of a school (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004; Patty, 2007).

Teacher supervision today can be very simple or very complex. Supervision can be carried out directly through the administration, with the principal or assistant principal doing much of the direct supervising, or more indirectly, through approaches such as mentoring or action research, in which other, usually more experienced teachers may be involved in the supervision of newer teachers. Schools may also use hybrids of these techniques - using both direct and indirect supervision techniques. Policies on supervision of teachers may come from a more centralized authority, such as the school district or superintendent, or be left up to individual schools and their administrators.

Teacher supervising methods are diverse and dependent upon the school needs and school culture. Individual supervision includes methods such as observation and individual conferences with teachers. Other approaches include walk-throughs, mentoring and peer coaching programs, and action research.

Applications

Observation

Dudney (2002) describes a model of teacher supervision in American schools that is perhaps most familiar to the: the principal sits in the back of the classroom while a lesson is going on; the teacher has prepared a lesson beforehand; the principal provides a write up, perhaps makes some suggestions, and moves on to the next teacher.

Teaching has been traditionally an isolated career choice. Often the only observations or feedback that teachers receive are annual or bi-annual observations from their principals. These visits are usually announced, but at their simplest form, there is no pre-discussion and very little or no face-to-face follow up. These types of interactions have often produced atmospheres in schools in which observations are met with trepidation, discomfort, and ambiguity (Marshall, 2005; Dudney, 2002). However, while teacher observation is often seen as the most antiquated form of teacher supervising, and in some schools and districts still carries the stigma as a method of supervision that is constantly searching for mistakes that the teacher is making (Dudney, 2002), there are methods of observation that can be powerful tools for improving instruction, and empowering teachers to become actively engaged in their own learning process (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

Issues with Observation

There are many issues with using teacher observation as a form of supervision, especially if the goal is to provide teachers with concrete, useful feedback and create a culture of assessment and improvement. Principals can often only evaluate a tiny percentage of a teacher's classes per year, and these small subsets of evaluations often carry little weight. Furthermore, when teachers know they are being evaluated, they may prepare an elaborate lesson, or feel uncomfortable about the evaluation, giving the evaluator little insight into the true strengths and weaknesses of that teacher because the lesson observed is uncharacteristic. This is especially true if the teacher is uncertain about the expectations during the observation, or in their work (Marshall, 2005).

A Tool to Improve Instruction

However, observing teachers can also be a powerful tool for improving instruction. Teaching is a difficult skill that can be constantly refined. Observation from a supervisor can be beneficial to teachers and a school in many ways. Perhaps the most important factor is ensuring that a teacher does not see class observation as an opportunity to unfairly criticize or find mistakes. Rather, in an ideal situation, the teacher and supervisor will become partners in improvement through constructive criticism, goal-setting, and support. This approach may be more difficult than it sounds, because not all teachers may buy into or believe in the goals of the observation. Teachers who are resistant to the method, or find it hard to reveal their opinions to a supervisor may have had negative experiences with supervision in the past (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004).

A Comprehensive Approach

Dudney (2002) encourages an approach to observation in which the teacher and supervisor engage in pre-observation discussions, conferring to determine the focus of the evaluation, and the methods by which information will be collected. During the evaluation, the supervisor will collect the data, focusing on the previously discussed and agreed upon focus. Afterwards, the teacher and supervisor meet and discuss the observation, the supervisor provides feedback, and together they set goals for further evaluations.

This method of evaluation is certainly more time-intensive and difficult than simply filling out a form with no face-to-face interaction; however, the rewards of this type of observation can be much more beneficial. Observation may be most helpful to newer teachers with less experience, as it provides an opportunity for self-reflection and critique in the most crucial years of their development as a beginner teacher.

Clinical Supervision

The type of observation that Dudney (2002) describes falls under the umbrella of clinical supervision, developed in the 1960s on the basis that teachers should set goals and be assessed on these goals using various methods (Aseltine, Faryniarz, & Rigazio-DiGilio, 2006; Sullivan & Glanz, 2004). Successful clinical supervision is dependent upon several factors: it is goal oriented and intent upon improving both the individual teachers and the school; there must be a high degree of mutual trust between the teachers and observers, as well as a commitment to carrying out the mission of the school; the observers must have a high degree of expertise in teaching and learning methods in order to provide feedback (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

Individual Conferences

Conferences entail sitting down with a supervisor, usually a principal or an assistant principal, and discussing issues of personal professional development, as well as classroom issues. Meetings are usually held one-on-one and it is important to note that, much like clinical supervision, trust must be established between the teacher and supervisor in order for the conferences to be fruitful - that they are helping teachers solve problems and develop better teaching and classroom practices (Garubo & Rothstein, 1998).

Conferences must be carefully planned by both parties involved: how often they will meet, what the goals are, and what the role of the supervisor will be. For more novice teachers, supervisors may take a larger lead in making suggestions or giving options. In another conferencing relationship, in which the teacher is more experienced, the supervisor may simply act as a sounding board or guide to help the teacher in certain issues. Practiced and competent supervisors will assist their teachers in answering the questions that improve their teaching - their motivations, strengths, weaknesses - as well as the requisite needs of their students (Garubo & Rothstein, 1998).

Individual conferences with teachers on a regular basis can go a long way in another realm of school issues - the isolation that is so prevalent in schools. Through these conversations and goal-setting meetings, teachers will not feel detached and alone in dealing with their problems and triumphs in the classroom.

Walk-Throughs

Walk-throughs are a type of supervisory tool that is more indirect than observations or conferences. The walk-through helps reduce the isolation of teachers in the classroom, displays and discusses what they are doing well, and what they can improve on. The requirements of successfully implementing walk-throughs as a supervision method are similar to that of clinical supervision - mutual trust, a culture of collaboration, and an understood mission (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

There are many models of walk-throughs; however, there are characteristics that they share. Walk-throughs often occur on a professional development day in which students are absent from the building. On the designated day, teachers visit assigned classrooms, review student work, and look for proof that students are learning according to the school's mission. Teachers may view student portfolios, lesson plans, or other aspects of the classroom. Afterwards, teachers meet and discuss the observations, and some sort of observation is given back to the principal or administration (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

This method has several goals and benefits. One of the primary goals is to reduce isolation of teachers that is so prevalent in many schools. Another is a professional development opportunity - learning from teachers around them, and relating what one individual is doing to another in the same building. If successful, the walk-through can provide validation, constructive criticism, valuable new ideas, as well a sense of connection to other teachers and administrators in the institution. Walk-throughs may also occur during class time, in which teachers are observed by other groups of teachers, or teachers take over each others' classes to learn or teach various methods (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

Group Development

One of the most underrated tasks of a supervisor is fostering leadership ability in others. Researchers often call for increased autonomy and leadership opportunities for teachers. These leadership tasks often come up the most when teachers work in groups. Improving group dynamics is a crucial task in supervision of teachers, especially in many models of instruction today that stress teamwork and collaboration. An effective supervisor must be able to foster group activity, while dealing with conflicts that are sure to arise.

Supervisors may use various tasks to foster group development:

• They may create teams of teachers within schools to address various issues such as curriculum and instruction or other school issues such as disciplinary procedures (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004);

• Teachers may supervise other teachers in teams; and,

• Mentoring or peer coaching programs may be instituted (Sullivan & Glanz, 2004).

Action Research

Action Research is a practice in which colleagues in a school study the conditions within their institution in order to make improvements in teaching and learning (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004). The concept stems from the ideas of Kurt Lewin, a social scientist who believed that research should not be conducted in the vacuum of a laboratory, but should focus on reflection on actions, and whether these actions improve the quality of life (Lewin, 1948). The theory is applied to education by asking teachers and administrators to evaluate and reflect on teaching and learning in the classroom.

Action research allows the supervisor to empower teachers to improve the school. It requires the supervisor to engage at various levels - from the beginning teacher to the teacher who is already an established leader, and choose an appropriate strategy for improving the school, while enhancing leadership skills in others (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004).

The tasks of action research vary and include selecting a focus area, designing a plan, carrying out that plan, and evaluation. The process often takes a significant period of time, and may result in considerable changes in the school. The role of the supervisor in action research is to provide teachers with enough information and guidance so that they are successful. This may include a variety of tasks: convincing some teachers that this is the right course of action, providing instruments to gather and analyze data, and providing the time and resources to teachers when they run into issues or problems they need to solve (Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2004).

Issues

Glickman, Gordon, & Ross Gordon (2004) call successful supervision the "glue of a successful school" (pp. 8) - a practice that has enormous potential to improve teacher instruction, and consequently student achievement, throughout an entire institution. However, it is not an easy task to bridge the gap between simply supervising teachers and using supervision techniques to meet goals such as improving student outcomes, or improving individual teaching skills.

Supervision & Leadership

Supervision that achieves these goals requires the supervisor to have a wide breadth of knowledge about teaching and how to improve teaching, interpersonal skills, the ability to steer a group towards a common goal, and the skills to develop leadership in others. Patty (2007) reported on a study of principals which found that in addition to effective teachers, principals who were less bogged down in the daily administrative tasks of running a school and were more concerned with and involved in improving classroom practices could positively impact student achievement. Schools with leaders who were open to change, and made teacher improvement their first priority, led schools in which students were achieving at high rates.

Glanz, Shulman, & Sullivan (2007), in a case study which was part of a three-part study of supervision and leadership, found that principals are central to establishing a culture of empowering teachers and cultivating an ethos of collaboration. A principal who is dealing with the breadth of individual personalities and competency levels of various teachers may need different supervision styles based on the individual they are supervising. Glickman, Gordon, & Ross-Gordon (2004) write of a variety of approaches and techniques based on the goals the supervisor is attempting to accomplish and the individual teachers' competency levels. The researchers stress the importance of moving towards teacher autonomy and leadership; however, they recognize that certain situations and individuals require more decisive supervision than others.

Improving Student Outcomes

The research suggests that effective teacher supervision can directly improve student outcomes. In a case study of three schools - urban, rural, and suburban - Aseltine, Faryniarz, & Rigazio-DiGilio (2006) found that using the classroom data garnered from supervising teachers and applying that data to promote learning opportunities for teachers universally raised student test scores, aligned professional development, and increased the capacity for decision making and intervention for teachers on behalf of their students.

However, Marshall (2005) reminds us that supervision often fails to achieve this goal. Reasons include that principals are often too busy to effectively evaluate teachers and that evaluations often do not focus on student learning. Today there is greater pressure than ever, especially in public schools, to improve student achievement or face consequences. Schools face penalties, which do not create a situation for improving learning opportunities for teachers; rather, the supervision process may be fraught with nervousness and covering flaws rather than fixing them.

Time Constraints

Today's principals, the primary supervisors in public schools, often have a Herculean task in simply running the day to day operations of a school. Supervision takes a large amount of time when the supervisor performs cursory evaluations; in-depth supervision and support takes even more time and effort, even when supervisors delegate these tasks to others in the school. The hurdles that supervisors face in schools and from the outside are often barriers to effective supervision. Principals may be bogged down by other responsibilities that take up much of their time. Many unions have kept teachers supervision from becoming a part of teacher's evaluation (Aseltine, Faryniarz, & Rigazio-DiGilio, 2006); furthermore, the culture and conditions of a school play a large role in how effective supervision of teachers can be at raising student achievement and professionally developing teachers to become more effective classroom instructors.

The goals of teacher supervision are varied. However, in the most effective schools, school leaders use supervision in order to improve teaching methods, and in turn further foster student learning. Effective supervision may have other benefits that improve schools, including higher teacher retention, more focused professional development, and a better understood school culture because supervision techniques can often help alleviate symptoms such as isolation and lack of understanding regarding a teacher's role and responsibility, which lead to high attrition rates and burnout (Gold, 1984). Supervising teachers effectively can have a direct impact on the success of a child's education.

Terms & Concepts

Action Research: Action research is a type of supervision in schools in which members of the institution study the conditions within the school in order to make improvements to teaching and learning.

Clinical Supervision: Clinical Supervision is a type of supervision in which teachers set goals and are assessed on these goals through observation by and discussion with their supervisor.

Group Development: Group development includes tasks such as mentoring or peer coaching, in which teachers often supervise each other, or work in groups to improve teaching and learning.

Instructional Leadership: Instructional leadership is a type of leadership practiced by principals in which they are more involved in classroom practices and improving teaching in the classroom.

Observation: Observation is the most familiar type of teacher supervision in schools, where supervisors sit in and observe classes taught by teachers, and then give feedback in one way or another.

Professional Development: Professional development refers to activities that improve various skills or continue the education of an individual within a school. Opportunities may include classes, lectures, or trainings.

Teacher Autonomy: Teacher autonomy occurs when teachers reach a level of expertise that grants them more independence or self-sufficiency in classroom matters. Many researchers argue that increasing teacher autonomy should be a goal of administrators who supervise teachers.

Teacher Supervision: Teacher Supervision refers to a variety of methods supervisors use to ensure teachers are measuring up the standards set by the school or district. Teacher supervision may also be used to improve teaching methods and student outcomes.

Walk-Through: Walk-through is a method of supervision in which groups of teachers visit assigned classrooms, review student work, and meet to discuss observations.

Bibliography

Aseltine, J. M., Faryniarz, J. O., & Rigazio-DiGilio, A. J. (2006). Supervision for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Bullock, S. (2012). Creating a space for the development of professional knowledge: A self-study of supervising teacher candidates during practicum placements. Studying Teacher Education: Journal of Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, 8, 143–156. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=77492967&site=ehost-live

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Investing in quality teaching: State-level strategies 1999. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

Dudney, G. M. (2002). Facilitating teacher development through supervisory class observations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED469715). Retrieved October 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Education Research Database. http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/7c/a5.pdf

Garubo, R. C., & Rothstein, S. W. (1998). Supportive supervision in schools. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.

Glanz, J., Shulman, V., & Sullivan, S. (2007). Impact of instructional supervision on student achievement: Can we make the connection? Chicago, IL: Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED496124). Retrieved October 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Education Research Database. http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/28/08/04.pdf

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2004). SuperVision and instructional leadership, brief edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.

Gold, Y. (1984). Burnout: A major problem for the teaching profession. Education, 104 , 271–275. Retrieved September 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=4717189&site=ehost-live

Hine, G. C., & Lavery, S. D. (2014). Action research: Informing professional practice within schools. Issues in Educational Research, 24, 162–173. Retrieved November 3, 2014 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=98931660

Kalule, L., & Bouchamma, Y. (2013). Supervisors' perception of instructional supervision. International Studies In Educational Administration (Commonwealth Council For Educational Administration & Management (CCEAM)), 41, 89–104. Retrieved November 3, 2014 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90454705

Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers.

Marshall, K. (2005). It's time to rethink teacher supervision and evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 86 , 727–735. Retrieved October 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17188277&site=ehost-live

Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2013). A new view of walk-throughs. Educational Leadership, 70, 42–45. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86921388&site=ehost-live

Patty, A. (2007). New study highlights role of principal. International Educator, 21 , 28. Retrieved October 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24359732&site=ehost-live

Range, B., Scherz, S., Holt, C., & Young, S. (2011). Supervision and evaluation: The Wyoming perspective. Educational Assessment, Evaluation & Accountability, 23, 243–265.Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=61978004&site=ehost-live

Rooney, J. (2005). Teacher supervision: If it ain't working…Educational Leadership, 63 , 88–89. Retrieved October 9, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18772802&site=ehost-live

Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2004). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Suggested Reading

Acheson, K., & Damien, G. M. (1997). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers (4th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

Bell, C. R. (1996). Managers as mentors: Building partnerships for learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Fantozzi, V. B. (2013). "Oh God, she is looking at every little thing I am doing!" student teachers' constructions of the observation experience. Current Issues in Education, 16, 1–13. Retrieved November 3, 2014 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=88843627

Firestond, W. A., & Riehl, C. (Eds). (2005). A new agenda for research in educational leadership. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Hesselbein, F., Goldsmith, M., & Bechard, R. (1996). The leader of the future: New visions, strategies, and practices for the next era. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Ingersoll, R. (2003). Who controls teachers' work: Power and accountability in America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Viles, J., & Bondi, J. (2004) Supervision: A guide to practice (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall