CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of study y In Malaysia, as in many other developing countries, education has been considered to be one of the imperative fields of economic growth and developments. y According to Segun (2004), the importance of school supervision in today¶s educational system requires for a greater attention. y Nowadays, people are becoming more conscious than in the past about the significance of education and people are getting more interested to get involved in school¶s system to ensure the achievement of the school¶s instruction as well as to be part of the school¶s activities (Beesong & Ojong, 2009).

1.2 Statement of Problem y Not all schools in Malaysia could implement it successfully, especially for the schools that are located at the remote area such as in Sarawak. y Instructional supervision plays a vital role in ensuring the teachers always keep on improving and enhancing their knowledge and skills in teaching. y However, does it really work in schools? So, who should to be blamed on this matter? Is it due to the lack of time, resources, teachers¶ motivation or the school management?

1.3 Research objectives Given this background, the aim of this study is as mentioned below: 1. To examine the challenges of instructional supervision among secondary school teachers at rural areas in Sarawak 2. To identify the significance of instructional supervision towards students¶ performance

1.4 Research questions This particular study seeks to answer the following research questions: 1. What are the challenges in implementing instructional supervision at secondary rural schools? 2. What are the significance of instructional supervision towards students¶ performance?

1.5 Limitations and Delimitations y This study is limited in a way it will only be carried out to three secondary schools in district Sri Aman, Sarawak which are SMK St Luke, SMK Sri Aman and SMK Simanggang. y Delimitation of this study; it is only applicable to three secondary schools in Sri Aman that have been stated above.

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.0 Introduction y Malaysia¶s government believes that in order to survive in the competitive world economy, quality of education is the most helpful and functional key. (Afolakemi O & David O.,2006). y Supervision could be seen as an interaction involving some kind of established relationship between and among people, such that people influence people (Patrick, 2009).

2.1 Models and Methods of Supervision

2.1.1 Clinical Supervision y The original clinical supervision model included a six-step cycle made up of conferences, observations and pattern analysis merged in three distinct phases: the pre- observation conference, the classroom observation, and the post-observation conference (Zepeda, 2003). y Soelen (2003) claimed that clinical supervision is perceived as a direct method of supervision due to the standard cycle with a predetermined number of conferences and observations, regardless of the career stage and experience of the teacher.

2.1.2 Collaborative supervision y Harris and Ovando (1992) defined that collaborative supervision is a ³process by which people with diverse expertise such as teachers, principals, and supervisors work together with equal status and share commitment in order to achieve mutually beneficial instructional goals´.


Instructional supervision of this kind can be achieved through a peer coaching or a peer supervision model in which peers observe one another and provide feedback in a nonthreatening manner (Manning, 1988).

2.1.3 Developmental supervision y Developmental supervision supports the teacher in taking a personal journey by encouraging reflection on practice (Benin, 2006). y Developmental supervision provides individualized, client-centered guidance where the teacher and supervisor have a partnership in inquiry (Blumberg, 1980) that leads to teacher self-direction (Glickman et al., 1998). y The goal of developmental supervision is to support teachers in becoming selfdirecting.

2.1.4 Differentiated supervision y As in Soelen (2003), Glatthorn (1997) defined differentiated supervision as ³an approach to supervision that provides teachers with options about the types of supervisory and evaluative services that they could receive.´ y Marczely (2001) believed that a goal of differentiated supervision was to provide reasoned and meaningful supervision for every teacher.

2.2 Effective instructional supervision y Andrews, Basom, and Basom (2001) stated that the main purpose of instructional leadership is to improve and accomplish instruction by utilizing supervision as a way to improve teachers¶ skills and abilities. y According to Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (1998), supervision must be accepted to assist teachers in order to improve as well as enhance their instructional skills and abilities.

2.3 Ineffective instructional supervision

Supervision at its best should be a collaborative approach rather than ³inspection, oversight, and judgment´ (Blasé & Blasé, 2004, p. 8). To add to ineffective supervision, Renihan (2005) provided the Profile of a Lousy Supervisor as below:

‡ Demonstrates inadequate basic listening skills; ‡ Unclear expectations; ‡ Did not have a sense of how teachers were doing; ‡ No initial conference to identify your needs; ‡ Unprepared for supervising the lesson; ‡ Supervisee did not value the opinion; ‡ No basic understanding about what you were teaching; ‡ Only vague feedback provided; ‡ Supervisor¶s focus was on developing the skill/technique, not you as a person; ‡ Exclusively negative feedback; ‡ Supervisee was left not knowing what to improve on; ‡ Purpose was only to fill a requirement to have a certain number of supervisions completed (p. 4).



Research Design y y Mixed-method research (quantitative and qualitative) This study will be designed to get some reviews on principals and teachers on their perspective on the challenges of instructional supervision at their schools

3.2 Samples and Population y y Population: Rural secondary schools in Sri Aman, Sarawak Sample: 3 principals and teachers of SMK St Luke, SMK Sri Aman and SMK Simanggang.

3.4 Instrumentation y y Questionnaire Semi-structured Interview

3.4.1 Section A: Demographic Data 3.4.2 Section B: Perceptions on objectives of supervision 3.4.3 Section C: Perceptions on sufficiency of school resources / facilities 3.4.4 Section D: Perceptions on efficiency of school management 3.4.5 Section E: Perceptions on teachers and principals¶ motivation towards instructional supervision

3.5 Data Analysis y y SPSS 14.0 Frequency

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful