-
Use Cases
-
Resources
-
Pricing
1875
% complete
Supervisory methods, which relied on inspection based on intuition rather than technical or scientific knowledge (Sullivan, 2013, p. 10). Inspectional practices did not view teachers as competent (Sullivan, 2013, p. 10). Because supervision as inspection through visitation gained wide application in schools, it is the first model that characterizes early methods in supervision (Sullivan, 2013, p. 10).
1900
% complete
This model focused on promoting the efficiency of the worker through management, direction, and control-oriented supervision (Sullivan, 2013, p. 12). Bureaucratic methods of supervision aimed at finding a legitimate and suitable position for control-oriented supervision within the school bureaucracy (Sullivan, 2013, p. 12). This business model took general principles of management and applied it to school systems (Sullivan, 2013, p. 13).
1920
% complete
Democratic supervision criticized supervisory methods of rating, shifted supervisory theory and practice to more democratic, focused on improvement, and minimized the evaluative function (Sullivan, 2013, p. 13). The supervisor was no longer in the position or role of the autocrat since it was inhumane and unwise (Sullivan, 2013, p. 14). Democratic supervision implied that educators, including teachers, curriculum specialists, and supervisors, would cooperate to improve instruction through supervisory councils (Sullivan, 2013, p. 14). Teachers were involved in the development of courses, were offered genuine assistance, and regarded as fellow-workers (Sullivan, 2013, p. 14).
1930
% complete
Scientific approaches to supervisory practice in schools emerged when the autocratic practices of supervision were no longer viable (Sullivan, 2013, p. 15). Proponents stated that the application of scientific principles would place supervision on a professional basis (Sullivan, 2013, p. 15). The supervisor had to analyze teaching situations with expertness, use data, develop new means and methods of instruction, know-how teachers learn to teach and have the ability to teach them how to teach and evaluate (Sullivan, 2013, p. 15). This model suggested that supervision involves improving instruction based on classroom observations (Sullivan, 2013, p. 15).
1960
% complete
Democratic methods in supervision were expanded and clarified in the 1960s in the form of supervision as leadership (Sullivan, 2013, p. 16). The socio-political concerns for justice, equality, and anti-war sentiments drastically shaped education and supervision by maintaining that the supervisor must extend “democracy in their relationships with teachers” by promoting supervision as a leadership function (Sullivan, 2013, p. 16). Supervisors would develop mutually acceptable goals, extend cooperative and democratic methods of supervision, improve classroom instruction, and promote research and professional leadership (Sullivan, 2013, p. 17).
1970
% complete
Clinical supervision grew out of dissatisfaction with traditional educational practice and supervisory methods (Sullivan, 2013, p. 17). Its attractiveness was its emphasis on collegiality and collaborative practices over fault-finding supervision (Sullivan, 2013, p. 17). Clinical supervision incorporated a “lesser-known version of the pre-conference, observation, post-conference cycle” of supervision (Sullivan, 2013, p. 17). The leading supervisory goals of the 1970s were improving instructing, promoting student learning, instructional leadership, and democratic practices (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18).
1990
% complete
In the early 1980s, developmental supervision acknowledged varied levels of teaching abilities, and, by the end of the decade, transformational leadership advocated that supervisors serve as change agents (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18). As teachers became active participants in decision-making processes they gained empowerment (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18). Peer supervision and the "teacher as a leader" emerged as an alternative to traditional supervision (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18). The transition of supervision marked refinement in the growing idea of supervision as a democratic industry (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18).
2000 - present
% complete
Standards-based reform has changed supervision so drastically that it identified a new and current model of supervision that influenced curriculum, supervision, and teacher education (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18). Supervisors must implement practices that assure the technical capability of teachers by depending on checklists to determine the degree to which teachers are meeting various curricular and instructional objectives embedded in core curriculum standards at various grade levels (Sullivan, 2013, p. 18). President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 with the purpose of redefining the federal role in K–12 education (Sullivan, 2013, p. 21). Four basic principals would help raise student achievement "(1) stronger accountability for results, (2) increased flexibility and local control, (3) expanded options for parents, and (4) an emphasis on teaching methods that presumably have been proven to work" (Sullivan, 2013, p. 21). " Principals and assistant principals are highly accountable for addressing curriculum standards, promoting teaching to the standards, and ensuring higher student academic performance on standardized tests" (Sullivan, 2013, p. 21).
Sullivan, S. (2013). Supervision That Improves Teaching And Learning (4th ed.). Retrieved from
https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781452292939/