Sergiovanni & Starratt (2007) stated that supervision should be a norm, not an event. How does a leader create a climate where supervision is the norm? In Sergiovanni & Starratt’s (2007) framework for supervision, they provide three leadership pathways that will help supervisors improve academic achievement in schools. These three pathways are instructional capacity, instructional quality, and student engagement. As these three continue to improve, so will student achievement.
Four theories of supervision and four sources of authority were discussed through a scenario. Each of the theories view teachers differently. In the scientific management theory, teachers are viewed as people who implement and therefore they must be closely supervised to ensure that they are implementing the curriculum or teaching system properly. The human relations view teachers as a voice to be considered before implementation. Human resources view teachers as ones who need to be motivated by taking charge of their work life and being held accountable for sharing goals. The normative/cultural views teachers as a contributing community member.
When considering the four sources of authority it is important to know that a supervisor may practice a combination of these. The supervisor relies heavily on specific qualities within each of these types of authority. The Bureaucratic supervisor relies on hierarchal authority. The Personal supervisor relies on motivation and their interpersonal skills to lead. The Professional supervisor relies on “informed knowledge of the craft of teaching” and teacher expertise (Sergiovanni & Starratt’s, 2007, pg. 31 ). The Moral supervisor relies on the teacher’s commitment to the community.
Throughout this week’s readings, the question, “What must I do to be an effective leader?” kept running through my head. I know that Nolan and Hoover (2010) are correct about the importance of building trusting relationship. Without trust, learning cannot take place. As a former fifth grade teacher, this proved to be true. Students were not willing to share, ask questions or make mistakes until they felt safe. They needed to trust me and the other students in the classroom. The same is true for adults. I currently supervise 16 teacher interns and to receive any type of coaching from me, they must feel safe to ask questions and make mistakes. I have spent a lot of time and effort to build these relationships, not only with my interns, but also with the collaborating teachers. I am processing the theories and sources of authority and still trying to determine which authority or combination of authorities would best define me as a leader.
I was left with some questions that I would like to investigate further. How does a principal provide conditions for teachers to engage in supervisory functions? How can a leader create a climate in which supervision is a norm and not an event? We often can get students to participate, but Sergiovanni & Starratt (2007) discuss student’s commitment to learning. How do you build, within students, a commitment to learning?
Nolan, J., & Hoover, L.A. (2010). Teacher supervision and evaluation: Theory into practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (3rd edition)
Sergiovanni, T. J., Starratt, R. J. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition, (8th Ed.), (xv-53). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.