Supervision Models of Supervision: Supervisory

Supervision Models of supervision: Supervisory practices Methods of teacher supervision vary widely throughout the nation. There is no uniform standard for measuring teachers that is deemed to be universally applicable to all situations. However, there has been a growing impetus to create supervision programs which are formalized and provide effective feedback to teachers in an ongoing fashion throughout the school year. Three of these models include professional development plans, clinical supervision, and differentiated evaluation.

Professional development plans are based upon the concept that by investing in and empowering professional educators, the quality of education in the classroom will improve. Professional development plans attempt to build teacher knowledge through self-accountability. The plans encourage teachers to set goals to improve teaching techniques and standards and "models preferred instructional practices or activities both in the classroom and through the professional development itself -- i.e. through active learning" (Firestone et al. 2008: 123).

In a professional development plan, teachers must set specific goals for themselves to improve in various areas such as taking educational initiatives to improve their experience as educators; taking steps to meet state standards for students; and collaborating with colleagues. However, professional development plans must not merely be ambitious in terms of the goals they set: they must be specific and support educators in their ability to achieve lofty aims.

For example, one such a program in New Jersey involving peer reviews of fellow teachers to monitor progress in their professional development plans was found to be unwieldy because of "the lack of time to get together, the reality of high administrator turnover rates, the daily outside demands of their jobs, and physical distance between administrators" (Firestone et al. 2008: 142).

Without an effective mechanism to monitor development plans and encourage accountability -- which requires an investment of time and money -- the administrative hassle of asking teachers to create such plans may not be worthwhile. Another method of assessment is clinical supervision. Clinical supervision is a much more structured program. It is based upon the principle of mentorship and shapes teacher development through education through instituting collaborative structures of exchange.

Teachers set goals as in the case of professional development plans, but their supervisors help 'map' how they will meet these goals in terms of specifics and create a schema of accountability. Clinical supervision thus has more of a 'top-down' model than professional development's focus upon personal, self-directed teacher empowerment. It is based upon an ongoing, continuously developing relationship between a supervisor and a supervisee who meet frequently and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the supervisee.

Together they plan "job-related activities that reinforce supervisee strengths and systematically improve weaknesses, along with the implementation of these activities by the supervisee as observed by the supervisor" (Knoff 1968: 40). Observation and consistent and direct measurement of specific goals for improvement is thus another critical component of this methodology.

While most professional development programs tend to have relatively few 'check-ins,' the nature of supervision ensures there is a "joint analysis of these activities in a feedback conference using formative evaluations to acknowledge newly developed and observed supervisee skills and additional skills that will further improve his professional practice" (Knoff 1968: 40). Clinical supervision is intensely personalized and may be of particular benefit to a young employee who does not yet know what he or she is capable of as a teacher.

This enables the supervisor to target specific domains which the supervisee is lacking. It also encourages the young teacher to set meaningful goals (which is yet another criticism of professional development plans, because some teachers may genuinely not know how to set useful goals for themselves and their students). However, for a more seasoned professional, the "intensive, hierarchical, interpersonally focused relationship" might seem smothering, even patronizing, and they may believe that they are better able to set goals for themselves, based upon past knowledge (Knoff 1968: 241).

And once again, administrative support of teachers is demanded to ensure that the goals for teachers regarding education and enhancing student experiences in the classroom can truly become a reality. Differentiated or diversified supervision has become increasingly popular in light of critiques of traditional teacher education programs and the rise of alternative certification of teachers trained in different disciplines who wish to enter the classroom.

"The differentiated model of supervision & #8230;is framed in such a way that new faculty, excellent faculty, and troubled faculty are all given individual attention best suited for their own needs. There are four approaches ranging from directive supervision, to directive informational supervision, to collaborative supervision, to nondirective supervision" (Rettig, Lampe & Garcia 2000:2). Thus differentiated or diversified supervision allows for supervision and guidance specifically tailored to the teacher's needs.

Like clinical supervision, there are individuated goals, but these are less formalized as part of a holistic program, given that the various backgrounds of teachers will present specific challenges: the challenge of a new graduate uncertain of his or her ability to hold the attention of a class because of youth is different than that of a middle-aged professional teaching math to young people for the first time and is uncertain.