CLINICAL SUPERVISION: A PRINCIPAL'S PERSPECTIVE
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009865 |
| Published date | 01 January 1983 |
| Pages | 14-20 |
| Date | 01 January 1983 |
| Author | GEOFFREY B. ISHERWOOD |
| Subject Matter | Education |
THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
VOLUME XXI, NUMBER 1 WINTER, 1983
CLINICAL SUPERVISION:
A PRINCIPAL'S PERSPECTIVE
GEOFFREY B. ISHERWOOD
The purpose of this study was to describe effective clinical supervisory behavior as
perceived
by
school principals and to contrast the findings with other current studies
of clinical supervision. Three aspects of a principal's supervisory behavior were
studied, the verbal behavior used by the principal with the teacher in post-
observation lesson analysis sessions, the basis of authority the principal had over the
teachers, and the frequency of clinical supervisory behavior. Sixty-five principals
completed a Q-sort that described eight different supervisors and rated them from
most to least effective. Only the principal's supervisory verbal behavior was
perceived as related to the perception of effective clinical supervision.
The purpose of this study was to describe effective clinical supervisory
behavior as perceived by public school principals. Following Cogan,
clinical supervision was defined as "the rationale and practice designed to
improve the teacher's classroom performance" as distinct from the more
general notion of supervision that has to do with curriculum improvement,
teacher evaluation, and the improvement of school climate.1 In practice,
clinical supervision implies "planning for, observation, analysis and
treatment of the teacher's classroom performance".2
Three aspects of supervisory behavior were isolated for study, the
supervisor's verbal behavior (SVB) during post-observation analysis
sessions with a teacher, the basis of the principal's authority over the
teacher within the school (AUTH), and the frequency (FREQ) of the
clinical supervision sessions.
A number of studies have isolated SVB as salient in the study of
supervision. Amidon and Flanders3 and Blumberg and Cusick4, using the
Flanders interaction analysis scheme (or a variant), have shown that
teachers in describing effective supervisors have been able to make
distinctions based upon the supervisor's verbal behavior. More specifically,
Blumberg5 and Amidon6 have shown that SVB classified as more "indirect"
(accepting feelings, praising, asking questions, …) or more "direct" (telling,
giving directions …) is an effective way of distinguishing between
supervisors during post-observation conferences. Martin, Isherwood and
Rapagna, using a supervisor trained to be either direct or indirect with a
teacher during lesson analysis, found that either approach would bring
GEOFFREY B. ISHERWOOD Is Associate Professor, Administration and Policy Studies in
Education, McGill University, Montreal, P.Q. Canada H3A 1Y2.
To continue reading
Request your trial