¶ … supervision necessary? For many years, teacher quality has been a major focus in the United States (Berlinger, p. 14). Many states, throughout history, have worked to improve quality through legislation, changes in policies, and reform in various processes that are transforming teacher preparation, new teacher assessment and support systems, content-specific professional development, recruitment, and certification systems. These efforts have been aided by strong collaborative networks within states and by funding provided by the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 (p. 17).

Recently, experts have suggested that supervision, as at least traditionally viewed, is no longer useful. In Educational Supervision: Perspectives, Issues, and Controversies, the issue "Should Supervision be Abolished?" is presented (Glanz, 1997). One professor argued for the abolition of supervision, presenting many questions on the issue and offering some suggestions for changing the roles of supervisors. The professor analyzed the legitimacy of the fundamental assumptions underlying the theory and practice of supervision. He also challenged his audience to consider many notions they have about the practice of supervision for teachers.

I want to make clear at the outset what I mean by supervision. I am speaking of supervision, as experienced by most teachers, as evaluation of classroom teaching. Whether that practice follows procedures under the rubric of clinical supervision, human resource development supervision, democratic supervision, classroom effectiveness supervision, or whatever, it does not matter. No matter how sophisticated the procedure, if it involves a supervisor observing a classroom teaching episode, a post observation conference with the teacher, and a written report that goes onto the teacher's file, then that is the supervision I propose to abolish." (p. 128)

The professor gives further evidence regarding the lack of effectiveness of supervision in addition to the adverse effects it has on teachers. He describes the experience of supervision as "humiliating" to teachers. He concludes his essay by outlining two roles for supervisors "after the abolition of supervision." (p. 134)

One role is as a teacher evaluator, and...

Evaluators would not deal with tenured teachers. (p. 140)
Bob Alfonso, former vice-president for academic affairs at East Tennessee State University, opposes this viewpoint, arguing, "Supervision cannot be abolished." (p. 39) Alfonso affirms his belief in teacher autonomy and professionalism, insisting that supervision is not "inherently demeaning" to teachers but is an "important instructional support for teachers" and an "organizational obligation." (p. 39-42)

According to Alfonso, it is absurd to suggest that supervision be abolished: "Abolish supervision? And replace it with what? Every formal organization... provides for some system of supervision.. While it may be argued that instructional supervision has not always been based on a model consistent with the nature of school and the characteristics of the teaching profession, that argument does not then lead one to the conclusion that supervision should be abandoned." (p. 52)

According to Alfonso, teachers need supervision to provide direction, reinforcement, assistance, and reward or recognition. He argues against cutting off supervision at the tenure point by saying: "Indeed, it would be organizationally irresponsible to say to teachers, 'Go ahead, do your work, you've got tenure now. We won't pay much attention to what you do and won't observe and critique your work. In short, you won't have any supervision, and you will not be evaluated anymore." (p. 54)

School Systems

As school districts strive to improve the skills of their teachers, the education system strives to ensure accountability and professional growth (Calabrese). Before schools operated as collaborative learning systems, teacher accountability and professional growth were dealt with through a process of clinical supervision and evaluation.

In a hierarchical system, supervision and evaluation start at the top and work down. In this system, the school superintendent supervises and evaluates the principal. The principal subsequently supervises and evaluates the teacher.

This system holds…