Overcoming Obstacles to Effective Teacher Supervision: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 44
About This Presentation
Title:

Overcoming Obstacles to Effective Teacher Supervision:

Description:

Overcoming Obstacles to Effective Teacher Supervision: What the ... Perception of Competence. Self-perception of principals regarding ... Competence ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:1575
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 45
Provided by: ear7
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Overcoming Obstacles to Effective Teacher Supervision:


1
Overcoming Obstacles to Effective Teacher
Supervision
  • What the Research Indicates
  • What Principals Can DoAbout It
  • Dr. Ronald M. Wilder
  • EARCOS Administrators Conference 2007

2
A few thoughts before we begin
  • Background and limitations of this research
  • Know that we dont know
  • Dialogue and participation
  • Focus on improvement
  • The workshop handbook
  • Our schedule

3
Challenges of Purpose
  • Why do we assess teachers?

4
Review of the literature on purposes of evaluation
  • There are two main purposes to evaluation
    quality control and improvement of practice
  • The history of teacher evaluation and current
    policy makers have demonstrated a tendency
    towards quality control
  • Recent trends in teacher evaluation methods have
    emphasized the improvement of practice

5
Popham (1988) asserts an insurmountable conflict
between the two evaluation purposes and between
summative and formative evaluation
6
Most still see the dual purpose accountability
and improvement of practice as inseparable
(Danielson, 2001 Holland and Garman, 2001
Naugle et al., 2000)
7
There is no direct link between teacher
evaluation and student achievement. Nor is there
any specific research demonstrating that one kind
of assessment process has more of an impact on
student learning than another. The connections
are indirect and correlational.
8
The research has demonstrated that the
implications of teacher evaluations done poorly,
inconsistently, or by untrained and unqualified
evaluators can have devastating repercussions for
teachers, administrators, and community culture
and morale.
9
A growing body of research shows that the
quality of the teacher in the classroom is the
most important schooling factor predicting
student outcomes. (Goldhaber Anthony, 2004,
p. 4)
10
the most important factor affecting student
learning is the teachermore can be done to
improve education by improving the effectiveness
of teachers than by any single factor.(Wright,
Horn, and Sanders, 1997, in Marzano)
11
leadership is second only to classroom
instruction among all-school-related factors that
contribute to what students learn at
school.Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and
Wahlstrom (2004) in Klump and Barton (2007)
12
Challenges in Training
  • Are we qualified to assess teacher performance?

13
Areas of study for highest degree held
14
University training in assessment
  • Training in evaluation is not a significant part
    of administrator training programs (Jordan,
    Phillips, and Brown, 2004)
  • Jordan (2004) and Protheroe (2002)most
    university administrative training programs are
    inadequate in training administration in what
    good teaching looks like, instructional
    strategies that are effective, and pedagogy

15
  • University training in administration has been
    widely criticized (Levine Tirozzi) as inadequate
    to the demands of the jobadditional
    responsibilities of instructional leadership as
    well as management are time consuming and
    physically overwhelming
  • Unless university administrative programs are
    deliberate in their administrative preparation
    program, formal training in evaluation in a
    degree program is unlikely

16
Principal training in clock hours over past three
years
17
Other Training
  • Training outside official programs is critical
    but most report that it does not occur 20
    reported having no training at all in the past
    three years
  • Administrators who have been away from
    administrative training programs more than 8
    years are not likely to have current practice in
    specific aspects of assessment training, or most
    current understanding of pedagogy and best
    instructional practices

18
It is incumbent upon principals to insist upon
adequate and ongoing professional development in
curriculum and instruction alongside preparation
in their own schools evaluation system. Without
professional development in specific evaluation
models and in the analysis of specific data
sources, principal feedback to teachers will lack
depth and credibility.
19
Glanz (2000) argues that supervisors will need
specialized knowledge and skills to meet
organizational challenges in the twenty-first
century. Acheson and Smith (1986) contend
that supervision should be done by a supervisor
who is knowledgeable, specially trained,
trustworthy, and experienced. Teachers wanted
their supervisors to have knowledge about
effective teaching, have training in supervisory
techniques, establish a trusting relationship
with them, hold a post-observation conference to
provide feedback as soon as possibleand provide
for reflective discussion (Dollansky, 1998)
20
Apart from the principal, others involved in the
teacher evaluation process
21
Multiple Assessors
  • Even involving other evaluators does not end the
    problem of training unless it is made systemic
  • Each evaluation source requires
    understandingunderstanding requires training.
    This is the case for every person involved in the
    evaluation process
  • Glatthorn (1997) asserted that teachers who
    have not been trained to observe do not make
    reliable data sources, teachers in conference
    with each other tend to give excessive praise,
    and many teachers find the experience
    threatening (p. 59).

22
Estimate of time, in , of school year as
principal spent on evaluation of teaching using
current school model
23
Time for Assessment
  • An evaluation policy recommended by Frase and
    Streshly (1994) suggested that 40-50 of a
    principals time on the job should be devoted to
    staff evaluation. However, only 3 of the
    principals reported spending more than 30 of
    their time evaluating teachers, and none
    indicated spending more than 40...58 reported
    spending no more than 10 of their administrative
    time on the evaluation of teachers for formative
    and summative purposes.

24
Challenges in Application
  • What barriers or obstacles are there to effective
    evaluation?

25
Current State of Evaluation in EARCOS Schools
(2006)
  • 83 of principals spent less than 20 of time on
    evaluation
  • 13 of schools have no standards or no evaluation
    process
  • Evaluation is done primarily by administration
  • In some cases, a system may exist but is not
    being followed
  • Despite philosophical leanings elsewhere, there
    is a heavy reliance on clinical supervision
  • Specific training in supervision is lacking
  • 31 of administrators do not have certification
    or licensure

26
Considerations in Effectively Assessing Teacher
Practices
  • Constructivist theory
  • Holistic education
  • Cooperative learning
  • Brain research
  • Differentiated instruction
  • Backwards planning (Understanding by Design)
  • Student learning outcomes

27
Challenges of Perception
  • How do we see ourselves as evaluators?

28
Perception of Competence
  • Self-perception of principals regarding
    qualifications is quite high
  • Almost ¾ of principals believe that teachers
    perceive principals as competent and qualified
  • Principals perceive themselves as qualified and
    that teachers perceive them this way as well
  • There is a strong philosophical leaning toward
    formative and away from summative evaluation
    processes by principals

29
Perception of Competence
  • Principals in this study rated evaluation for
    accountability purposes low, yet the primary
    means of evaluation continued to reflect an
    approach that emphasized summative evaluation
    over formative evaluation, a process that has
    traditionally been a means of evaluating for
    accountability.

30
Perception of Competence
  • Principals in this study believed that their own
    knowledge and understanding were sufficient for
    them to be conducting holistic,
    constructivist-based, learner-centered,
    effective, and credible teacher evaluations.

31
Challenges of Reality
  • What are our limitations as assessors and
    evaluators of teacher performance?

32
Reality of Limitations
  • Data suggested that principals may have lacked
    knowledge grounded in differentiated supervision,
    a training background in the methods and data
    sources involved in a differentiated model, and a
    school evaluation model consistent with their own
    evaluation philosophy.

33
Reality of Limitations
  • Also of note is the number of principals who
    received no in-service training in their schools
    method. This is a particularly salient issue when
    one observes that 78 of schools reported using
    in-house developed standards.
  • The data suggest a lack of training on the part
    of principals that is likely to confirm the
    suspicions by teachers and some researchers that
    most principals are not as qualified or competent
    to evaluate teachers as they believe they are.

34
Reality of Limitations
  • with 12 hours as a minimum training standard
    (Glatthorn Danielson and McGreal Stronge and
    Tucker) fewer than half the principals meet this
    standard
  • previous research is skeptical about the degree
    to which principals are qualified to give fair
    and effective evaluations
  • unfamiliarity with differentiated evaluation
    models calls into question its application

35
Reality of Limitations
  • 1/3 of principals received no more than OJT for
    the method used at their school
  • 78 had in-house models but only 5 reported
    receiving in-house training

36
From expert to lead learner know what you
dont know
  • We believe that students should become critical
    thinkers and curious problem solvers, but if
    teachers and principals present themselves as
    expertspriding themselves on knowing, not
    learninghow can we expect students to learn how
    to learn and become resourceful leaders?
  • Kohm and Nance (2007)

37
Challenges of Relationship
  • How do we construct an effective teacher
    assessment program?

38
Effective evaluation is first and foremost about
relationship. (Bolman and Deal, 1997
Sergiovanni, 1992)
39
Schools and school districts can get tough about
student learning, can use their minds to identify
new and better ideas, and can establish
mechanisms of development. But successful
strategies always involve relationships,
relationships, relationships, relationships.Ful
lan (2001) in Kohm and Nance (2007)
40
although the rhetoric of supervision espouses
collaboration and colleagueship as essential to
supervision, teacher isolation remains the result
of life in most schools. Holland and Garman
(2001)
41
Teachers and principals who are willing to
dialogue openly and honestly about their own
strengths and weaknesses may participate in
meaningful evaluation.
42
A Shift in ThinkingAligning Philosophy of
Teacher and Student Assessment
  • Assessment for and assessment of
  • Backwards Design to Assessment
  • Standards, Assessment, Strategies
  • Differentiation
  • Self-assessment
  • Peer review
  • Feedback, feedback, feedback
  • Formative processes are descriptive,
    non-evaluative
  • Summative processes are evaluative against the
    standardsthey measure performance and
    achievement (for teacher assessment, that means
    student outcomes)

43
Conclusions
  • Schools (administration and teachers) must be
    clear on their purposes in teacher assessment
  • Assessment processes should be developed in
    concert with teachers
  • Administrators are lead learners in the process,
    not expertswe simply do not know all that we
    need to know
  • Evaluators (principals and others) must insist on
    adequate training in their schools assessment
    system
  • Schools must move from strictly summative, single
    data source processes to formative,
    differentiated, multiple data source processes
  • Schools may want to consider involving colleagues
    in most of the formative processes and assigning
    summative responsibilities to the principals
  • Administrators must be deliberate in scheduling
    time into their daily schedule for teacher
    supervision duties (drop-ins, walk-throughs,
    informal conversations, providing feedback)
  • Remember that teachers are, first and foremost,
    colleagues rather than subordinatesinvesting
    time in building collegial relationships is
    probably the most effective way of meeting the
    purposes of assessment

44
Discussion
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com