| . |
. |
. |
|
Moving
Towards an Interactive Approach
|
|
|
|
One of the greatest challenges
of program management is teacher supervision. Whether we are program directors, teacher
trainers, curriculum specialists, or inspectors, our supervisorial responsibilities are
rarely appreciated by the teachers we work with. In fact, most teachers react defensively
and hostilely towards supervision even though it is a standard part to most programs.
Teachers often view supervision as a threat and become anxious when interacting with their
supervisors. These adversarial attitudes often stem from traditional supervisor-supervisee
relationships and the unsystematic and subjective nature of traditional classroom visits
that are usually unannounced, supervisor-centered, authoritarian, directive, and
judgmental. Whether we supervise teachers for the purposes of retention, review,
dismissal, promotion, reward, or reprimand, our efforts need not be viewed as negative or
unproductive.
|
|
|
|
Freeman (1982) and Gebhard (1984) outline a
number of approaches to language teacher supervision; some are reminiscent of the more
traditional models referred to above while others break the traditional mold, moving away
from an authoritarian orientation. Freeman introduces three approaches to teacher
observation/supervision: 1) the supervisory approach (with the supervisor as the
authority figure), 2) the alternatives approach (with the supervisor as a provider
of alternative perspectives), and 3) the non-directive approach (with the
supervisor as "understander"). Gebhard expands upon Freeman's ideas and
introduces five models: 1) directive supervision (with a supervisor who directs and
evaluates teaching), 2) alternative supervision (with a supervisor and supervisee
who share the responsibility for generating alternatives), 3) collaborative supervision
(with a supervisor who works with but does not direct supervisees), 4) non-directive
supervision (with a non-judgmental supervisor who listens to and restates supervisees'
ideas), and 5) creative supervision (with a supervisor who makes use of a
combination of approaches). Each model typifies a distinct approach to supervision, with
different supervisor/supervisee expectations, relationships, and anticipated outcomes.
Whatever approach we endorse, supervision is always challenging. One of the greatest
challenges we face is how to turn negative attitudes towards supervision around so that
teachers (and our programs) can reap the rewards and benefits-in the form of professional
development and improved instruction.
|
|
|
In many English language teaching settings, we
can counter the negative attitudes that teachers have towards supervision by adopting an
approach which is more interactive than directive, more democratic than authoritarian,
more teacher-centered than supervisor-centered, more concrete than vague, more objective
than subjective, and more focused than unsystematic. Although each one of our teaching
settings is distinct, we need a model of supervision that lends itself towards more
productive supervisor/ supervisee interactions and outcomes. Approaches that are
characterized by honest dialog and constructive feedback will lead to professional growth
and result in positive supervisor/supervisee experiences and outcomes.
|
|
|
Clinical supervision is one non-traditional
approach that meets the criteria specified above. An examination of this approach (see
Acheson and Gall 1992) reveals that the use of clinical supervision techniques can
radically change supervisor/supervisee relationships, resulting in less stress and
anxiety-on the part of both the supervisor and teacher-and a more positive teacher
response to supervision.
|
|
|
In this article, I shall define clinical
supervision and outline those techniques associated with it that I have found most useful
when supervising ESL/EFL teachers. I am hoping that the detail provided here will give
readers tools that they can adapt to their own supervisorial contexts.
|
|
|
Clinical supervision: A definition
|
|
|
Clinical supervision has as its goal "the
professional development of teachers, with an emphasis on improving teachers' classroom
performance" (Acheson and Gall 1992:1). It is designed to engage the supervisor and
teacher in a supportive and interactive process that 1) provides objective feedback on
instruction; 2) diagnoses and solves instructional problems; 3) assists teachers in
developing strategies to promote learning, motivate students, and manage the classroom;
and 4) helps teachers develop a positive attitude towards continuous professional
development. Clinical supervision can be used to evaluate teachers for promotion,
retention, and dismissal as well.
|
|
|
The clinical supervision approach involves three
basic steps. The planning conference sets the stage for effective clinical
supervision. It involves a meeting between the supervisor and supervisee during which they
agree on the focus of the forthcoming classroom visit and a method for collecting data for
later analysis. The second step involves a classroom observation during which the
supervisor observes a lesson systematically and nonjudgmentally, collecting data related
to the objectives agreed upon during the planning conference. The third and final step
involves the feedback conference during which the supervisor meets with the teacher
to analyze the data collected during the classroom visit. In their most basic form, the
data provide a mirror-like reflection of classroom activities "so that teachers can
see what they are actually doing while teaching" (Acheson and Gall 1992:12). The
supervisor and supervisee interpret the data from the teacher's perspective with an eye
towards diagnosing and solving instructional problems. Throughout the three-stage process,
both supervisor and supervisee work together, initially to agree upon the major focus of
the classroom visit and later to analyze the classroom observation data to identify
successful classroom practices and remedy less successful ones.
|
|
|
The first stage of clinical supervision involves
a planning conference during which the supervisor and teacher set an agenda for the
forthcoming classroom visit. The goal of the planning conference is to identify and define
an area of genuine concern that the teacher would like to understand better or improve;
this topic then becomes the focus of the subsequent visit. In my experiences with clinical
supervision, I have found that planning conference discussions often center around at
least one of these seven issues: classroom management, classroom interaction, affective
factors, use ofresources, teaching techniques, methodology , and/or acquisition
. (See figure 1 for more specific
examples of teacher concerns.)
|
|
|
If it is assumed-as it should be-that there is
always some aspect of teaching which can be improved or altered to enhance a particular
classroom or instructional setting, both inexperienced and experienced teachers will
benefit from this dialog by targeting some aspect of their teaching for
"investigation." By specifying an area for investigation, the teacher helps to
mold the subsequent class observation and is more likely to explore solutions and/or
alternatives to targeted teaching practices during the feedback conference.
|
|
|
If lack of time and/or distance between the
supervisor and teacher make a face- to-face meeting impossible, a similar exchange of
information can occur over the phone or by mail. What is important is that supervisors
allow teachers to take an active role in setting the agenda for the classroom visit that
will follow the planning conference. Whether planning the classroom visit face-to-face or
long distance, I find it useful to end the planning conference by formulating, jointly
with the supervisee, one or two specific, nontrivial questions to serve as the focus of
the observation and subsequent feedback conference. Most recently I have used the
following "focus questions."
|
|
|
- How clear are my directions?
- What kinds of questions do I direct to students?
- Do I give all students equal attention?
- What is the distribution of student talk/ teacher talk in class? How much student
participation is there?
- What kinds of verbal and non-verbal feedback do I give students? To whom do I direct
these different types of feedback?
- How often do students direct their comments to classmates, and how often do they direct
them to the teacher?
- How well do I use the blackboard?
- How well do I answer students' questions? Are my answers more complex than the questions
require?
- Is my pacing too fast or too slow for the majority of students in the class?
- How well am I implementing the curriculum?
- How well do I handle unanticipated classroom events?
|
|
|
Once the focus of the upcoming classroom visit
is established, the teacher and supervisor agree upon a date and time for the class
observation as well as a preferred method for data collection (See figure
2 ). Making these decisions jointly eliminates much of
the stress and anxiety associated with traditional classroom visits and creates a
situation in which teachers are more responsive.
|
|
|
While some teacher supervisors have suggested
that the "selectivity" of clinical supervision might limit the teacher's
perspective, potential problems can be circumvented by a skillful supervisor who focuses
"the teacher's attention on a few aspects of teaching, yet relates these aspects to
the total context in which the behaviors" occur. (Acheson and Gall 1992:112)
|
|
|
The second stage of clinical
supervision involves a classroom visit by the supervisor, with
agreed-upon questions and data-collection techniques in hand.
I have found three data collection techniques, presented in Acheson
and Gall (1992), particularly effective: Selective Verbatim,
Seating Chart Observation Records , and Wide-Lens Techniques.
|
|
|
One of the keys to successful
clinical supervision is selecting the data-collection technique
that best complements the focus of the classroom observation.
When these techniques are described in more detail below, it will
become evident that each technique lends itself to the observation
of different types of classroom behavior. (See Appendix
1 for a listing of focus questions
and corresponding data collection techniques.)
|
|
|
Selective verbatim. The
teaching/learning environment is greatly influenced by how teachers and students interact
verbally and non- verbally. As a result, teachers often identify interaction patterns as a
classroom behavior they want to understand better. An analysis of verbal communication
patterns can help teachers understand the dynamics of their classrooms as well as the
effectiveness of their instruction. The selective verbatim data-collection technique
involves word by word transcription of select verbal events that highlight
classroom verbal interactions (e.g., question- asking behavior, teacher feedback, the
language used to structure/organize the class, classroom management statements,
instructions, etc.).
|
|
|
The selective verbatim technique requires the
supervisor to accurately record interaction patterns. If a teacher is interested in the
types of questions s/he poses, the supervisor would write down all the questions asked
during the class. (Later during the feedback conference, the supervisor and teacher can
analyze the questions for level of cognitive complexity, type of language used, types of
questions asked, amount of information requested, number of questions asked at the same
time, need for rephrasing or repetition, etc.) If the teacher is interested in the clarity
and conciseness of his/her instructions, the supervisor would write down, word for word,
the teacher's instructions. (Subsequent analysis would help the teacher see the type of
language used, the logic and complexity of the instructions, the number of tasks required
at a given time, the need for restatement or paraphrase, etc.) If the teacher would like
to understand better the types of verbal feedback s/he gives to students, the supervisor
would write down all instances of feedback- as well as the immediately proceeding student
remark or action that prompted the feedback. (Later, transcripts can be reviewed for the
amount, variety, nature, and specificity of feedback provided. In addition, an analysis of
these data can help the teacher judge the effects of positive and negative feedback on
student motivation, on-task activity, and self- esteem.)
|
|
|
Selective verbatim transcripts provide an
objective, nonjudgmental record of a teacher's verbal behavior. The transcripts, hold up a
"verbal mirror" (Acheson and Gall 1992:112) of select verbal behaviors, to be
viewed and reviewed by the supervisor and teacher later during the feedback conference.
|
|
|
The selective verbatim technique
simply requires a pen and paper. The only difficulty associated
with this data-collection technique relates to the speed with
which the supervisor must record data. If the class goes too fast
to record all instances of the targeted verbal behavior, the supervisor
should indicate gaps in the transcripts (e.g., a line or an arrow)
because it is better to record fewer verbal statements word for
word than to paraphrase actual utterances. Paraphrased data simply
do not provide the "verbal mirror" needed for meaningful
analysis.
|
|
|
Seating chart observation records.
While selective verbatim techniques focus on verbal behaviors, seating chart observation
records document non-verbal patterns of interaction including direction of verbal flow,
amount of participation, teacher/student movement, and at- task behaviors. Seating chart
records provide objective and easy-to-interpret data that will later allow the teacher to
analyze the students' level of attentiveness and participation, students' at- task
behaviors, the teacher's distribution of time and attention among students, the teacher's
movement patterns, the teacher's eye contact with different students, etc.
|
|
|
With a seating chart as a starting
point-one which identifies each student and relevant characteristics
(e.g., gender)-he supervisor/observer can record classroom behaviors,
like those listed below, at regular time intervals with arrows,
lines, tally marks, check marks, or other symbols:
|
|
|
- student-teacher interactions, recipients of verbal communication, and/or non- verbal
recognition (indicated with tally marks);
- direction of verbal flow, who is talking to whom (indicated with arrows);
- instances of teacher praise and/or criticism (indicated with tally marks);
- instances of student initiation (indicated with tally marks);
- teacher/student movement patterns (indicated with arrows);
- on-task behaviors: at task, stalling, out of seat, off-topic (indicated with symbols
representing each type of behavior);
- types of tasks students are engaged in-reading, writing, problem solving, collaborating
(indicated with symbols representing each type of task).
|
|
|
Seating chart records reveal a range of
classroom behaviors that are difficult to monitor on one's own. They may reveal that a
teacher has "location biases," paying more attention to students on the left
side of the room or in the front of the room than to students in other locations. They
might show that the teacher favors certain students by, for example, calling on men more
often than women, giving more feedback to boys than girls, praising smart students more
often than average students, paying attention to ethnic majority students more than ethnic
minority students, etc. Seating chart records can also reveal teacher biases in movement
patterns and students' movement patterns during tasks. Teachers may discover that they
always remain on one side of the room or move in a distracting way (e.g., with their backs
towards their students). Seating chart records can also indicate if students are doing
what they are supposed to be doing, whether it be reading, writing, answering questions,
problem solving, and/or working cooperatively.
|
|
|
Effective seating chart observations simply
require that the supervisor sit where she can see all students in the classroom and that
observations be recorded at regular time intervals (e.g., every five minutes). When done
systematically and thoroughly, the supervisor can condense important aspects of classroom
behavior on a single sheet of paper. One of the greatest benefits of this technique is
that it allows the teacher and supervisor to spotlight specific teacher behaviors and/or
certain students in class while observing what the class is doing as a whole.
|
|
|
Wide-lens techniques. While
selective verbatim and seating chart observation records techniques allow teacher and
supervisor to focus on select teaching behaviors, wide-lens techniques provide descriptive
data about a large number of teacher/student behaviors in the form of written notes,
video-tapes, or audiotapes. Wide-lens techniques make few prior assumptions about what is
important or effective in teaching; thus, they represent a good starting point for
supervising teachers who are defensive or not yet ready to select particular teaching
behaviors for improvement. After reviewing wide-lens data, teachers are often ready to
focus on more specific behaviors in future observation sessions.
|
|
|
Wide-lens techniques are quite versatile and
flexible. Think of the options the supervisor has, for example, when videotaping a class
(see Footnote 1 ). With a
so-called "wider" lens, the supervisor can tape many classroom behaviors,
focusing perhaps on the class as a whole or groups of students; with a narrower lens, the
supervisor can tape more selectively, focusing on just the teacher, a single student, or
one side of the room. The same can be accomplished with wide-lens notes. The supervisor
can keep running documentation on a wide range of classroom activities/behaviors or s/he
can focus on aspects of the classroom that catch his/her eye as particularly interesting
or revealing about classroom dynamics, teaching effectiveness, or instructional practices.
|
|
|
The third and final step of the process involves
a follow-up conference that is interactive, supportive, and collaborative. If the planning
conference has identified one or two areas of genuine concern, and if the observational
data are accurate and objective, the teacher should find the feedback conference
informative, instructive, and useful.
|
|
|
Ideally, the feedback conference should take
place fairly soon after the class observation so that both teacher and supervisor can
decipher data and recall the class as a whole. During the conference, the supervisor and
teacher should analyze the data collected during the class observation, focusing on
answers to the target questions established for the visit. The goal is to guide the
teacher in the analysis, interpretation, and modification of instructional practices based
on objective data. Unlike more traditional supervision approaches that oblige the
supervisor to declare a verdict on a teacher's effectiveness, with clinical supervision,
the data itself provides the evidence and revelations. By means of a non-judgmental
analysis of data, with both the teacher and supervisor contributing to the discussion,
teaching/ learning phenomena can be described, analyzed, and evaluated. Together, the
supervisor and teacher do the following:
|
|
|
- Analyze the data cooperatively.
- Reach agreement on what is actually happening.
- Interpret the data, considering causes and consequences of actions.
- Reach decisions about future actions by considering alternative approaches.
|
|
|
Failure in this stage of clinical supervision is
often the fault of judgmental supervisors who push teachers into defensive responses-so
typical of traditional, evaluative approaches. To be most effective, supervisors need to
set aside enough time to allow teachers to come to their own conclusions about the data
and explore alternatives in a non-threatening dialog. I try to keep the following in mind
when engaged in feedback conferences with teachers:
|
|
|
- Supervisors often tell teachers to minimize teacher talk in order to maximize student
participation/language use. Similarly, when supervising teachers, we need to listen more
and talk less so that teachers can be active participants in the supervision process.
- Supervisors must give teachers enough time to reflect and comment on the data. We must
resist the temptation to impose our own judgments at the very start of the feedback
session.
- Supervisors should ask non-threatening questions that will guide teachers in the
evaluation of their teaching and help them to clarify their thoughts. We can pose
questions such as these: What practices would you repeat if you were to teach this class
again? What would you change if you were to teach this class again? If you were a student,
what would you want to change?
- Supervisors should praise effective teaching practices that teachers point out when
analyzing the data.
- Supervisors should reinforce teachers' good ideas. We can acknowledge that we are
listening and that we value teachers' opinions and feelings by paraphrasing their thoughts
and/or building upon them.
- Supervisors must be willing to ignore some very obvious classroom problems if the
teacher has come up with solutions for other problems that s/he has discovered. It is
impossible to solve all classroom problems after one visit.
- Supervisors must recognize the inherent tension that exists between supervision and
evaluation and the potential conflicts that can arise between teacher and supervisor. A
high level of trust is needed so that teachers willingly entertain alternatives.
- Supervisors must give teachers credit for being able to help themselves. As guides, we
can nurture true professional development and improved teaching.
- Supervisors must be open to alternative solutions. Teachers may come up with
alternatives that we had never considered. We must acknowledge the fact that there is no
one single answer for instructional dilemmas.
- Supervisors can help teachers contextualize findings and relate them to the larger
teaching/learning context so that oversimplified conclusions are not drawn from the data.
|
|
|
Teacher supervision is one of the most
challenging areas of program management. The most notable challenge has to do with that
fact that our efforts are rarely appreciated by the teachers we serve; teachers feel
intimidated and threatened by the entire supervisorial process in part because the models
of supervision that we have inherited are authoritarian and directive. To complicate
matters, some of us work in instructional settings where supervisors are expected to act
in a top-down fashion to be considered qualified and competent (see Wallace, 1991).
|
|
|
The benefits of a clinical supervision approach
are many and varied. Most notably, clinical supervision gives us the opportunity to be
more interactive than directive, more democratic than authoritarian, more teacher-centered
than supervisor-centered, more concrete than vague, more objective than subjective, and
more focused than unsystematic. When we adopt clinical supervision, we endorse: 1)
face-to-face interaction between the supervisor and supervisee; 2) the active involvement
of the teacher in the three-stage supervision process; and 3) the use of real classroom
data for analysis. Through such an approach, we can provide objective feedback on
instruction, diagnose and solve instructional problems, assist teachers in developing
strategies to promote more effective instruction, and help teachers develop a positive
attitude towards continuous professional development.
|
|
|
Fredricka
L. Stoller is an assistant professor in the English as a second language/applied
linguistics program at Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff. She also directs the NAU
program in intensive English. |
|
|
Return
|
|
|
- Acheson K. A., and M. D. Gall, 1992. Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers:
Preservice and inservice applications (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.
- Freeman, D. 1982. Observing teachers: Three approaches to inservice training and
development. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 1, pp. 21-28.
- Gebhard, J. C. 1984. Models of supervision: Choices. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 3, pp. 501-14.
- Wallace, M. J. 1991. Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
figure 1
General areas of
teacher concern |
Specific examples of
concern |
| Classroom management |
Organization; lesson cohesion; pacing of
activities; digressions; transitions from activity to activity; pair/group/class work;
exploitation of unexpected or unplanned classroom occurrences |
| Classroom interaction |
Teacher-student interaction; student-student
interaction; student participation; amount of teacher talk |
| Affective factors |
Student/teacher attitudes; perceived relevance
of lesson; confidence building; student attentiveness; classroom atmosphere; student risk
taking; teacher encouragement and feedback |
| Use of resources |
Blackboard presentations; handouts; textbooks;
equipment (e.g., overhead projectors, tape recorders) |
| Teaching techniques |
Giving instructions; error correction; wait-time;
eliciting language; providing feedback; asking questions; creating information gaps |
| Methodology |
Teaching of reading, writing, speaking,
listening, grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, functions; teaching of communicative
competencies; fluency versus accuracy; incorporation of culture; introduction, practice,
review, and evaluation of language |
| Acquisition |
Amount of learning taking place |
figure 2
Data collection technique |
Brief description of technique |
| Selective Verbatim |
Word for word written record of what is said in
select "verbal events," determined by focus of observation questions |
| Seating Chart Observation Records |
Record of patterns of teacher- student
interaction, verbal flow, student and/or teacher movement, and at-task behaviors using a
seating chart |
| Wide-Lens Techniques |
Record of a large number of teaching phenomena
using notes taken during classroom observation or a video/audiotape recording of the class
being observed |
Footnote 1
| 1. A videotape of a class that is longer than 30
minutes is unnecessarily long. A 30-minute video has more than enough data to analyze. |
Appendix 1
Appendix
Focus questions and corresponding data collection techniques
Focus questions formulated during the
planning conference |
Data-collection technique that
complements focus question |
| How clear are my directions? |
Selective verbatim: Record teacher's directions
word for word |
| What kinds of questions do I direct to students? |
Selective verbatim: Record teacher's questions
word for word |
| Do I give all students equal attention? |
Seating chart observation record: Indicate who
the teacher speaks to and acknowledges (verbally and non-verbally) with tally marks |
| What is the distribution of student talk/teacher
talk in class? How much student participation is there? |
Seating chart observation record: Indicate, in
frequent time intervals, who is talking with check marks or tally marks. |
| What kinds of verbal and non-verbal feedback do
I give students? To whom do I direct these different types of feedback? |
Selective verbatim: Record instances of verbal
feedback word for word. Describe nonverbal feedback, as well as the immediately preceding
student remark or action that prompted the feedback.
Seating chart observation record: Keep track of students who receive verbal feedback and
non-verbal feedback with different symbols. |
| How often do students direct their comments to
classmates and how often do they direct them to the teacher? |
Seating chart observation record: Record, with
arrows, who is talking to whom during class. |
| How well do I use the blackboard? |
Selective verbatim: Record items written on the
blackboard in the way in which they are written on the blackboard. |
| How well do I answer student's questions? Are my
answers more complex than the questions merit? |
Selective verbatim: Record student's questions
and teacher's answers. |
| s my pacing too fast or too slow for the
majority of students in the class? |
Seating chart observation record: At frequent
time intervals, indicate students who seem to keep up with the pace, students who are
bored because the pace is too slow, and students who cannot keep up with the fast pace
with different symbols. |
| How well am I implementing the curriculum? |
Wide-lens notes, video, or audiotape |
| How well do I do with unanticipated classroom
events? |
Wide-lens notes, video, or audiotape |
|
Back to Article
|
. |
. |