Course: 8616|G2981|SCHOOL ADMIN.

& SUPERVISION
Semester:Autumn, 2022

Level: B.Ed

ASSIGNMENT No. 2

Name: Bibi Aqsa

Reg. No: 0000248406
 ASSIGNMENT No. 2
(Units 6-9)

Note: All questions carry equal marks.

Q.1 What do you know about the function of supervision discuss in detail? (20)

Q.2 What are dual focus, joint effort and growth orientation and how they interlink synergistic
supervision? (20)

Q.3 Introduce different approaches of supervision focusing the authoritarian and developmental
approach of supervision.
(20)
Q.4 Analyze the supervisory process of physical infrastructure and administrative practices for school
improvement. (20)

Q.5 Justify that technology is vital instrument for school administration and supervision.
(20)
Q.1 What do you know about the function of supervision discuss in detail?

Supervisor, being the manager in a direct contact with the operatives, has got multifarious
function to perform. The objective behind performance of these functions is to bring stability and
soundness in the organization which can be secured through increase in profits which is an end
result of higher productivity. Therefore, a supervisor should be concerned with performing the
following functions -

1. Planning and Organizing - Supervisor’s basic role is to plan the daily work schedule of
the workers by guiding them the nature of their work and also dividing the work amongst
the workers according to their interests, aptitudes, skills and interests.
2. Provision of working conditions - A supervisor plays an important role in the physical
setting of the factory and in arranging the physical resources at right place. This involves
providing proper sitting place, ventilation, lighting, water facilities etc. to workers. His
main responsibility is here to provide healthy and hygienic condition to the workers.
3. Leadership and Guidance - A supervisor is the leader of workers under him. He leads the
workers and influences them to work their best. He also guides the workers by fixing
production targets and by providing them instruction and guidelines to achieve those
targets.
4. Motivation - A supervisor plays an important role by providing different incentives to
workers to perform better. There are different monetary and non-monetary incentives which
can inspire the workers to work better.
5. Controlling - Controlling is an important function performed by supervisor. This will
involve
1. Recording the actual performance against the time schedule.
2. Checking of progress of work.
3. Finding out deviations if any and making solutions
4. If not independently solved, reporting it to top management.
6. Linking Pin - A supervisor proves to be a linking pin between management and workers.
He communicates the policies of management to workers also passes instructions to them
 on behalf of management. On the other hand, he has a close contact with the workers and
therefore can interact the problems, complaints, suggestions, etc to the management. In this
way, he communicates workers problems and brings it to the notice of management.
7. Grievance Handling - The supervisor can handle the grievances of the workers effectively
for this he has to do the following things :-
1. He can be in direct touch with workers.
2. By winning the confidence of the workers by solving their problems.
3. By taking worker problems on humanitarian grounds.
4. If he cannot tackle it independently, he can take the help and advice of management to
solve it.
8. Reporting - A supervisor has got an important role to report about the cost, quality and any
such output which can be responsible for increasing productivity. Factors like cost, output,
performance, quality, etc can be reported continually to the management.
9. Introducing new work methods - The supervisor here has to be conscious about the
environment of market and competition present. Therefore he can innovate the techniques
of production. He can shift the workers into fresh schedules whenever possible. He can also
try this best to keep on changing and improving to the physical environment around the
workers. This will result in
1. Higher productivity,
2. High Morale of Workers,
3. Satisfying working condition,
4. Improving human relations,
5. Higher Profits, and
6. High Stability
10. Enforcing Discipline - A supervisor can undertake many steps to maintain discipline in the
concern by regulating checks and measures, strictness in orders and instructions, keeping an
account of general discipline of factory, implementing penalties and punishments for the
indiscipline workers. All these above steps help in improving the overall discipline of the
factory.
Q.2 What are dual focus, joint effort and growth orientation and how they interlink
synergistic supervision?

Camille and Pierre met in their early forties after each one’s marriage had ended. Both were
deeply committed to their careers and to their new relationship. Camille, an accountant, had felt
pressured by her ex-husband to slow her progress toward partnership at her firm. Pierre, a
production manager at an automotive company, was embroiled in a bitter divorce from his wife,
who had given up her career to accommodate the geographic moves that his required. (As with
the other couples I’ve profiled in this article, these aren’t their real names.) Bruised by their past
experiences, they agreed to place their careers on an equal footing. Initially things went
smoothly, but two years in, Camille began to feel trapped on a professional path that she realized
she had chosen because “that was what the smart kids did.”

Mindful of their pact, Pierre calmly listened to her doubts and encouraged her to explore
alternatives. But as the months wore on, he began to feel weighed down as he juggled providing
emotional support to Camille, navigating their complex family logistics (both had children from
their former marriages), and succeeding in his demanding job. When he began to question his
own career direction, he wondered how the two of them could manage to change course. They
couldn’t afford to take time out from work, nor could they take much time to reflect and keep
their family and relationship afloat. Frustrated and exhausted, both wondered how they could
continue to find meaning and fulfillment in their lives.

Dual-earner couples are on the rise. According to Pew Research, in 63% of couples with children
in the United States, for example, both partners work (this figure is slightly higher in the EU).
Many of these are dual-career couples: Both partners are highly educated, work full-time in
demanding professional or managerial jobs, and see themselves on an upward path in their roles.
For these couples, as for Pierre and Camille, work is a primary source of identity and a primary
channel for ambition. Evidence is mounting from sociological research that when both partners
dedicate themselves to work and to home life, they reap benefits such as increased economic
freedom, a more satisfying relationship, and a lower-than-average chance of divorce.
Because their working lives and personal lives are deeply intertwined, however, dual-career
couples face unique challenges. How do they decide whose job to relocate for, when it’s OK for
one partner to make a risky career change, or who will leave work early to pick up a sick child
from school? How can they give family commitments—and each other—their full attention
while both of them are working in demanding roles? And when one of them wants to undertake a
professional reinvention, what does that mean for the other? They must work out these questions
together, in a way that lets both thrive in love and work. If they don’t, regrets and imbalances
quickly build up, threatening to hinder their careers, dissolve their relationship, or both.

Many of these challenges are well recognized, and I’ve previously written in HBR about how
companies can adapt their talent strategies to account for some of them (“Talent Management
and the Dual-Career Couple”). But for the couples themselves, little guidance is available. Most
advice treats major career decisions as if one is flying solo, without a partner, children, or aging
parents to consider. When it’s for couples, it focuses on their relationship, not how that intersects
with their professional dreams, or it addresses how to balance particular trade-offs, such as
careers versus family, or how to prioritize partners’ work travel. What couples need is a more
comprehensive approach for managing the moments when commitments and aspirations clash.

My personal experience in a dual-career couple, and my realization that little systematic

academic research had been done in this area, prompted a six-year investigation into the lives of
more than 100 dual-career couples, resulting in my forthcoming book, Couples That Work. The
people I studied come from around the world, range in age from mid-twenties to mid-sixties, and
represent a range of professions, from corporate executive to entrepreneur to worker in the
nonprofit sector. (See the sidebar “About the Research.”) My research revealed that dual-career
couples overcome their challenges by directly addressing deeper psychological and social
forces—such as struggles for power and control; personal hopes, fears, and losses; and
assumptions and cultural expectations about the roles partners should play in each other’s lives
and what it means to have a good relationship or career.

I also discovered that three transition points typically occur during dual-career couples’ working
and love lives, when those forces are particularly strong. It is during these transitions, I found,
that some couples craft a way to thrive in love and work, while others are plagued by conflict
and regret. By understanding each transition and knowing what questions to ask each other and
what traps to avoid, dual-career couples can emerge stronger, fulfilled in their relationships and
in their careers.

Transition 1: Working as a Couple

When Jamal and Emily met, in their late twenties, trade-offs were the last thing on their minds.
They were full of energy, optimistic, and determined to live life to the fullest. Jamal, a project
manager in a civil engineering firm, traveled extensively for work and was given increasingly
complex projects to lead, while Emily, who worked at a clothing company, had just been
promoted to her first management role. They saw each other mostly on weekends, which they
often spent on wilderness hiking adventures. They married 18 months after their first date.

Then, in the space of three months, their world changed dramatically. While Emily was pregnant
with their first child, Jamal’s boss asked him to run a critical infrastructure project in Mexico.
Jamal agreed to spend three weeks out of every month in Mexico City; designating some of his
pay raise to extra child care would allow Emily to keep working in Houston, where they lived.
But when their daughter, Aisha, was born two weeks early, Jamal was stuck in the Mexico City
airport waiting for a flight home. Soon Emily, who was single-handedly managing Aisha, her
job, and their home, discovered that the additional child care wasn’t enough; she felt
overburdened and unappreciated. Jamal was exhausted by the relentless travel and the stress of
the giant new project; he felt isolated, incompetent, and guilty.

Dual-career couples move from independent to interdependent careers and lives.

After many arguments, they settled on what they hoped was a practical solution: Because Jamal
earned more, Emily took a smaller project role that she could manage remotely, and she and
Aisha joined him in Mexico. But Emily felt disconnected from her company’s head office and
was passed over for a promotion, and eventually she grew resentful of the arrangement. By the
time Jamal’s boss began talking about his next assignment, their fighting had become intense.

The first transition that dual-career couples must navigate often comes as a response to the first
major life event they face together—typically a big career opportunity, the arrival of a child, or
the merger of families from previous relationships. To adapt, the partners must negotiate how to
prioritize their careers and divide family commitments. Doing so in a way that lets them both
thrive requires an underlying shift: They must move from having parallel, independent careers
and lives to having interdependent ones.

My research shows two common traps for couples negotiating their way through their first
transition:

Concentrating exclusively on the practical.

In the first transition in particular, couples often look for logistical solutions to their challenges,
as Jamal and Emily did when they arranged for extra child care and negotiated how many
weekends Jamal would be home. This focus is understandable—such problems are tangible, and
the underlying psychological and social tensions are murky and anxiety provoking—but it
prolongs the struggle, because those tensions remain unresolved.

Instead of simply negotiating over calendars and to-do lists, couples must understand, share, and
discuss the emotions, values, and fears underlying their decisions. Talking about feelings as well
as practicalities can help them mitigate and manage them.

Basing decisions primarily on money.

Many couples focus on economic gain as they decide where to live, whose career to prioritize,
and who will do the majority of the child care. But as sensible (and sometimes unavoidable) as
this is, it often means that their decisions end up at odds with their other values and desires.

Few people live for financial gain alone. In their careers they are also motivated by continual
learning and being given greater responsibilities. Outside work, they want to spend time with
their children and pursue personal interests. Couples may be attracted to a location because of
proximity to extended family, the quality of life it affords, or their ability to build a strong
community. Basing the decision to move to Mexico on Jamal’s higher salary meant that he and
Emily ignored their other interests, feeding their discontent.
Couples who are successful discuss the foundations and the structure of their joint path forward.
First, they must come to some agreement on core aspects of their relationship: their values,
boundaries, and fears. Negotiating and finding common ground in these areas helps them
navigate difficult decisions because they can agree on criteria in advance. Doing this together is
important; couples that make this arrangement work, I found, make choices openly and jointly,
rather than implicitly and for each other. The ones I studied who had never addressed their core
criteria struggled in later transitions, because those criteria never go away.

Next, couples must discuss how to prioritize their careers and divide family commitments.
Striving for 50/50 is not always the best option; neither must one decide to always give the
other’s career priority.

There are three basic models to consider: (1) In primary-secondary, one partner’s career takes
priority over the other’s for the duration of their working lives. The primary person dedicates
more time to work and less to the family, and his or her professional commitments (and
geographic requirements) usually come before the secondary person’s. (2) In turn taking, the
partners agree to periodically swap the primary and secondary positions. (3) In double-
primary, they continually juggle two primary careers.

My research shows that couples can feel fulfilled in their careers and relationships whichever
model they pursue, as long as it aligns with their values and they openly discuss and explicitly
agree on their options. Couples who pursue the third option are often the most successful,
although it’s arguably the most difficult, precisely because they are forced to address conflicts
most frequently.

To work past their deadlock, Emily and Jamal finally discussed what really mattered to them
beyond financial success. They identified pursuit of their chosen careers, proximity to nature,
and a stable home for Aisha where they could both actively parent her. They admitted their fears
of growing apart, and in response agreed to an important restriction: They would live in the same
city and would limit work travel to 25% of their time. They agreed to place their geographic
boundaries around North America, and Jamal suggested that they both draw circles on a map
around the cities where they felt they could make a home and have two careers. Their
conversations and mapping exercise eventually brought them to a resolution—and a new start in
Atlanta, where they would pursue a double-primary model. Three years later they are
progressing in their careers, happy in their family life, and expecting a second child.

Transition 2: Reinventing Themselves

Psychological theory holds that early in life many people follow career and personal paths that
conform to the expectations of their parents, friends, peers, and society, whereas in their middle
years many feel a pressing need for individuation, or breaking free of those expectations to
become authors of their own lives. This tends to happen in people’s forties, regardless of their
relationship status, and is part of a process colloquially known as the midlife crisis.

We tend to think of a midlife crisis mostly in personal terms (a husband leaves his wife, for
example, and buys a sports car), but in dual-career couples, the intense focus on professional
success means that the partners’ job tracks come under scrutiny as well. This combined personal
and professional crisis forms the basis of the second transition. Camille and Pierre, whose story
began this article, were in the midst of it.

As each partner wrestles with self-redefinition, the two often bump up against long-settled
arrangements they have made and the identities, relationship, and careers they have crafted
together. Some of those arrangements—whose career takes precedence, for example—may need
to be reconsidered to allow one partner to quit a job and explore alternatives. It may be painful to
question the choices they made together during the previous transition and have since built their
lives around. This can be threatening to a relationship; it’s not uncommon for one partner to
interpret the other’s desire to rethink past career choices as an inclination to rethink the
relationship as well, or even to potentially end it. Couples who handle this transition well find
ways to connect with and support each other through what can feel like a very solitary process.

The second transition often begins—as it did for Camille and Pierre—when one partner
reexamines a career or life path. That person must reflect on questions such as: What led me to
this impasse? Why did I make the choices I made? Who am I? What do I desire from life?
Whom do I want to become? He or she should also take time to explore alternative paths,
through networking events, job shadowing, secondments, volunteer work, and so forth. Such
individual reflection and exploration can lead couples to the first trap of the second transition:

Mistrust and defensiveness.

Living with a partner who is absorbed in exploring new paths can feel threatening. Painful
questions surface: Why is my partner not satisfied? Is this a career problem or a relationship
problem? Am I to blame? Why does he or she need new people? Am I no longer enough? These
doubts can lead to mistrust and defensiveness, which may push the exploring partner to withdraw
further from the relationship, making the other even more mistrustful and defensive, until
eventually the relationship itself becomes an obstacle to individuation, rather than a space for it.

In such a situation, people should first be open about their concerns and let their partners
reassure them that the angst is not about them or the relationship. Next, they should adopt what
literary critics call suspension of disbelief—that is, faith that the things they have doubts about
will unfold in interesting ways and are worth paying attention to. This attitude will both enrich
their own lives and make their partners’ exploration easier.

Finally, they should understand their role as supporters. Psychologists call this role in a
relationship the secure base and see it as vital to the other partner’s growth. Originally identified
and described by the psychologist John Bowlby, the secure base allows us to stretch ourselves by
stepping outside our comfort zone while someone by our side soothes our anxieties about doing
so. Without overly interfering, supporters should encourage their partners’ exploration and
reflection, even if it means moving away from the comfortable relationship they’ve already
established.

Q.3 Introduce different approaches of supervision focusing the authoritarian and

developmental approach of supervision.

Any jobs can be evolved in terms of their responsibilities and requirements as time goes due to
political, social and technological trends. It is evident in the field of supervision as it faces
reforms throughout its history. The evolution of schools has become the main input in quality
improvement policies and strategies. This led to the necessity to evaluate schools which focused
on accountability, quality control, organizational efficiency and quality assurance. To ensure the
minimum standard of academic, teaching, resources and administration are achieved,
governments that provide public schooling take steps to make the system in schools is
monitored. In the United States, during the period of 1600’s to late 1800’s local officers,
religious leaders and committee members visited schools to inspect and make judgments on
teachers and curricular standards. At this time, supervision focused on overseeing the teachers
and how schools were maintained. In the late 19th century, professional educators took over the
administrative responsibilities where they focused on instructional improvement for the first
time. Knowledge of teaching transformed successfully from administrators to teachers. In the
twentieth century, school administrators consist of principals, assistant superintendents,
curriculum coordinators, and consultants shared the responsibility of supervision and evaluation.
During this time, the scientific management theory which consists of inspection, domination and
quality control influenced supervision and evaluation. Many new systems were introduced in
supervision claimed that standard for teaching was introduced and the relationship between
teacher and supervisor was hierarchical. In the late 1980’s, research showing that teacher quality
was the primary variable to determine student achievement. This, lead to improving teacher
supervision process became the primary concern which aimed to improve instruction.

Concept of Supervision

Supervision is mainly focused on improving teachers’ instructional practices and classroom

practices to benefit students. Beach & Reinhartz (1989) claimed that the purpose of instructional
supervision is to offer sufficient information regarding their teaching that enhances their
instructional skills for performance improvement. This is supported by McQuarrie & Wood
(1991) who mentioned that supervision is aiming to guide and support teachers so that they can
learn and develop instructional practices. There are many different definitions of supervision
proposed by researchers as some focus on its nature and others focus on the function it entail.
The term ‘supervision is derived from the Latin words which bring the meaning as ‘over and
‘see’. Hornby (1962) defines supervision as a process that involves, watching, and directing
work, workers and organisations or institutions. Adams & Bickey (1966) defines supervision as
"A planned programme for the improvement of instructions". Nwokafor (1984) define
supervision as "that phase of school administration which focuses primarily upon the
achievement of the appropriate instructional expectations of the educational system". Ireland
(1994) defines that supervision is a process which enables the individuals’ goals are met and
interconnected that ultimately allows them to meet the organizational goal. Austin (1981) defines
supervision as a process that has chosen functions involving relationships that provides the best
services. Meanwhile, Kadushin (1985) classified supervision as a pathway that consists
administrative, supportive and educational where the supervisor is responsible in delivering all
these tasks to his supervisee. Sergiovanni & Starratt (1993) see supervision as a focal point that
intent to improve teacher’s knowledge, skills, and abilities to make informal decisions and solve
problem effectively. Other researchers also claim that supervision is an act of motivating
teachers, enhancing human relation and facilitating teachers to attempt new techniques in a more
comfortable environment.

Every school may have their own goals to achieve which will differ from others however, all
supervisors have the same goal that is ‘improving teachers’ performance .Initially supervision is
known as inspection which aimed to judge the performance of institutions and teachers rather
than improvement. Even though supervision and evaluation are related in terms of their
processes, the objective can be different between accountability and improvement. Inspection as
the evaluation method has been practiced to ensure the quality of system and strategies
implemented and maintain academic performance to be paralleled with educational goal.
Inspection tends to receive criticism as it is more on judgmental. This can be proofed as Jaffer
(2007) also pointed that inspection judges the performance of school only at one point with legal
requirements rather than considering the progression of the school. In another study done by
Burnham (1976) found that the process of inspection of school supervision used to make
judgments of the management of the school and the teachers than of focusing on their teaching
and student learning. This type of evaluation is known as Administrative Inspection in these
days. Due to this, inspection went through reforms where the term ‘supervision’ replaces it
gradually. To overcome the criticism on inspection, the concept of supervision is being
introduced in certain countries like Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh. It is also because, to
understand the purpose of ongoing support and guidance for school improvement. In the 19th
century, supervisors were being strict in supervising the teachers as they were having strict
requirement for their teachers. They visited classroom to observe to identify how closely the
teachers obey the specific instructions. They also found that the supervisors carried out their
tasks using authoritarian approach.

As mentioned before, in early days supervision was knows as inspection where the external
parties who were appointed would inspect teachers in schools. The formal activity of
instructional supervision by professional personnel started in the second half of the nineteenth
century as there was a development in school system due to population growth in main cities. At
this time, supervision of school shifted from bureaucratic to individual superintendent who was
being responsible in controlling and supervising instruction in school. Supervisor would inspect
classroom teaching and correct teacher behaviours. The existence of scientific management
would change the administration of schools. This would change the supervisory processes to be
more skilled professional. Moreover, teaching profession became scientific process due to the
emergence of educational theories. Even though changes occurred in supervision, there was still
the existence of observation and evaluation as Gordon (1997) called as ‘control supervision’ that
was compressed with inspection, oversight and judgment of classroom instruction. This is
because; more information is collected regarding teacher performance through observation and
evaluation information. Criteria included in evaluation forms enable to judge teachers quality of
instruction, classroom management and teaching behaviours. Observation and evaluation
involves face-to face visits that are carried out by supervisors to offer direct assistance. In the
process of direct assistance teachers are provided feedback for improvement through classroom
observation based on the data of formative and summative evaluation. At the same time,
collaborative approaches to instructional supervision began to appear in the form of clinical
supervision which gave a room for administrators and teachers to work together during the
observation in the notion improvement. This provided chances of existence of other form of
clinical supervision like peer observation, self assessment and action research and other models
of supervision. The development of school supervision has been a long and ongoing process
which taking place since the late nineteenth century up to the present day.

Moreover, the growth of formative approach in supervision has widespread and commonly used
than the previous model of inspection and evaluation. This approach enable teacher needs has
been taken into consideration which emphasize supervisors to enhance their techniques of
supervising to meet those needs. The aim of formative evaluation is to improve teacher’s
instructional skills. The system of evaluation is carried out into two ways they are formative and
summative assessment. In summative evaluation, teachers are judged on their performance by
ranking and rating their professional competency. Glickman et al. (2001) claimed Summative
teacher evaluation is an administrative function intended to meet the organizational need for
teacher accountability. It involves decisions about the level of a teacher’s performance.
Summative evaluation seeks to determine if the teacher has met minimum expectations. If the
teacher has not met his or her professional responsibilities, the summative process documents
inadequate performance for the purpose of remediation and, if necessary, termination.Formative
evaluation is intended to shape, support and improve teacher instruction. This form of evaluation
is recognized as supervision as it has the function of helping and supporting. Kleitman & Costa
(2014) claimed that formative assessment refers to a specific type of assessment which is not
‘marked’ (judged) by the trainer. This assessment provides extensive feedback towards the
performance of trainers which they feel non-threatening.

Q.4 Analyze the supervisory process of physical infrastructure and administrative

practices for school improvement.

Essential physical infrastructure facilities

Interactions between students, teachers and pedagogical content, and thus, education, generally
take place within a school’s physical infrastructure. Ensuring an adequate and sufficiently
equipped infrastructure is key, so that teaching ‘takes place in acceptable conditions and that
learning can flourish’. Indeed, physical infrastructure has significant impact on children’s
enrolment, attendance, completion rates and even learning achievements (e.g. the World Bank
found that investments in school facilities in Peru increased students’ attendance rates. Physical
infrastructure can also protect the lives of teachers and pupils, as well as investments in
education
 Various considerations must be taken into account when developing the physical infrastructure
of schools.

For instance, adapting facilities to children’s size and physical abilities is indispensable. Cultural
sensitivity and local customs must also be considered, such as toilets that are intended for use by
Muslims should not face Mecca.

Adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities in schools ‘improve access to
education and learning outcomes, particularly for girls, by providing a safe, inclusive and
equitable learning environment for all’. Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 6 and 4 aim for
universal access to WASH and inclusive and effective learning environments. The following
essential physical infrastructure facilities must be taken into account to reach those goals:

o Sanitation facilities: Privacy, cleanliness, safety, and easy-to-use sanitation facilities are
important. Toilets should be close to classrooms, cubicle doors should open inwards, toilets
should have covers, and facilities should have an appropriate ventilation system and regular
maintenance. Latrines, on the other hand, should be at least 50 metres away from the school and
30 metres away from any ground-source.

o Hygiene facilities: Sinks should be provided with water and a cleaning agent. The minimum
standard is 1 washing point per 100 children.

o Safe water: Schools must offer adequate access to potable water. This can be done through
proper plumbing infrastructure, a borehole, well or a water stream. Planners must set their own
standards based on their national circumstances and international standards (SDG 6 targets
universal access to drinking water, sanitation and hygiene for all by 2030; The Sphere Standards
annex states that 3 litres of water per pupil per day for drinking and hand washing is
the survival minimum required in schools

Electricity-wise, SDG 7 aims to ensure universal ‘access to affordable, reliable and modern
energy for all’. Electricity-based lightning improves teaching and therefore learning outcomes.
Every school should have electricity to provide lighting and energy for teaching as well as for the
equipment –computers and radios– and appliances such as refrigerators and stoves. Multiple
recommendations for school electrification programmes exist, such as leveraging ‘innovative
financing streams and public-private partnerships to fund electrification efforts’ and ensuring ‘
technical reliability of grid connections and equipment through standards and certification’,
among others.

As for having a secure physical environment, a fence should be constructed around the school to
demarcate the school grounds, prevent children from leaving school and keep out intrusions.
Fences can be made from galvanized line wires, vegetation or mud walls. Additionally, it is
essential to make sure buildings are built to resist different natural hazards, such as seismic-
resistant school infrastructure in earthquake zones, proper drainage and plumbing infrastructure
in flood zones, and securely attached roofs in wind-prone areas. For more information on this
subject see Policy page Buildings are not ready.

Finally, for garbage disposal, it is essential to have a designated area for garbage disposal at
schools, with dustbins and brooms included. Children should participate in cleaning and
maintaining the classroom (e.g. Standards used in the SWASTHH Project, Jharkhand India

Q.5 Justify that technology is vital instrument for school administration and
supervision.

Teachers often come under fire for their failure to fully integrate technology into their
classrooms. Until recently, however, very little has been said about the role of school
administrators in technology integration. This month, the Education World Tech Team
discusses how they think principals and other administrators can optimize technology use
in their schools.
"The most effective way school administrators can promote technology use is to themselves be
knowledgeable and effective users of technology," says Betty Kistler, computer technology
coordinator at Tuckahoe School in Southampton, New York.

"Principals play a big role in setting the climate of a building," agrees Cathy Chamberlain, a
technology consultant in the Oswego (New York) City School District. "Teachers who are on the
fence -- or think they don't have time to get involved with technology -- think twice when they
sense a positive attitude on the part of the administration.

"I work in five elementary schools," Chamberlain explains. "In my experience, technology
integration is highest in buildings in which the principal is involved and excited about
technology and its possibilities and is lowest in buildings in which the principal doesn't
demonstrate technology use while encouraging others to use it too. Modeling technology usage is
key if administrators want teachers to play an active role in technology integration."

John Simeone, Webmaster at Beach Street Middle School in West Islip, New York, adds, "Staff
members are more apt to use technology if administrators feel strongly about technology use for
reasons that are based in fact -- not merely on the assumption that they need to 'keep up' with
other schools or districts."

MODEL! MODEL! MODEL!

"Administrators need to model, model, model," stresses Marcia Reed, media center coordinator
at St. Pius X School in Toledo, Ohio. "They can do that by using technology for administrative
functions and by knowing how to use the hardware and software they expect teachers to use."

Mary Kreul, a technology specialist at Richards Elementary School in Whitefish Bay,

Wisconsin, agrees. "Weekly memos to staff members, schedule changes, meeting minutes, and
so on, can all be handled via e-mail. School news can be broadcast over the school cable system.
Attendance records, grading, and reporting can be technology-based -- with a system that's
intuitive, practical, and accessible. A school Web page can feature administrators providing brief
descriptions of the school and its mission, school highlights, or upcoming events."

"Principals can encourage the use of technology in their schools in other ways as well," says
Caroline Salerno, a fifth-grade teacher and Internet trainer at Bretton Woods Elementary School
in Hauppauge, New York. "They can

• support and encourage teachers who want to go to conferences and participate in staff
development.

• e-mail notices and agendas to staff, rather than printing and distributing them.

• ask that lesson plans be submitted through e-mail or on disk.

• foster technology growth by asking parents to write e-mail addresses on medical forms.

• insist that all teachers create a class Web page.

• attend technology conferences to see what other schools are doing, what other teachers are
doing to integrate technology, and what principals are doing to encourage the use of
technology in their schools and classrooms.

"District administrators need to do their jobs as well," Salerno adds, "by providing technology
training for principals!"

ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT!

School administrators, according to Fred Holmes, Webmaster at Osceola (Nebraska) Public

Schools, can easily promote technology integration. They can encourage teachers' curiosity about
what can be done using technology, provide incentives for teachers to attend workshops and
conferences, persuade teachers who use technology in the classroom to model that use for others,
set up a mentoring system so teachers have someone to go to for help and ideas, and provide
time for teachers to experiment with technology. "Administrators can't give teachers computers a
week before school starts and say, 'Here they are. Use them!'" Holmes says.
Providing opportunities for staff development is an important part of the administrator's role,
agrees Patrick Greene, a professor of education at Florida Gulf Coast University in Fort Myers,
Florida. "There's a two-step process to integrating technology into the curriculum," Greene
explains. "First, teachers must learn the hardware and software; then they must learn to integrate
it. Administrators should institute weekly training sessions for all teachers. The training should
inculcate an understanding level for each piece of software in a teacher's virtual toolkit, including
a word processor; spreadsheet, database, and presentation software; organization software; a
Web editor; and Internet tools. The culminating activity should be the development of a
comprehensive plan that each teacher writes for implementing technology-enhanced lessons in
his or her own classroom. When the training is complete, then -- and only then -- should teachers
be given computers for their classroom."

"There must be a strong focus on staff development, on helping teachers learn to use technology
as a tool for teaching and learning," agrees Mary Kreul. "Technology courses should not simply
provide hardware or software training, but should help teachers learn how to use technology in
the classroom to support students and extend learning opportunities. A technology integrator
should be available in each building to train and support teachers as they learn to use technology
effectively in the classrooms."

In addition, Kreul notes, "administrators should make budget and personnel decisions that ensure
that the school's technology is up-to-date and in good working condition. They should make sure
that the focus of technology is to enhance student learning and that technology decisions are
made by teachers who use technology, know the curriculum, and are cognizant of the needs of
the students."

"Assuming hardware, software, networking, and training needs have been met," adds Art Lader,
Webmaster at Aiken (South Carolina) High School, "principals can promote technology
integration by providing time for planning, collaboration, and implementation of technology-
based activities. In the end, it's often a lack of time that prevents good ideas from being realized
as valuable activities," Lader notes.
Jennifer Wagner, technology coordinator at Crossroads Christian School in Corona, California,
best summed up the comments of all the Tech Team members. In response to the question,
"What do school administrators need to know, do, and provide to promote technology integration
among their staff and students?" Wagner replies

What do they need to know?

• How to use word processing.

• How to use the Internet.

• How to use e-mail.

• The status of technology on their campus.

• Which teachers are -- and are not -- using technology.

What they need to do?

• Support the technology coordinator.

• Reward teachers using technology.

• Encourage teachers who are not using technology.

• Visit classrooms to see computer use.

• Take an active role in using technology.

What do they need to provide?

• Opportunities for staff development.

• Sufficient up-to-date, workable computer equipment.

• Funds for computer improvements.

• Time and resources for troubleshooting programs and future planning.

• Internet access.

The Education World Tech Team includes 40 dedicated and knowledgeable educational-
technology professionals who have volunteered to contribute to occasional articles that draw on
their varied expertise and experience. Stay tuned in the months ahead as members of the Tech
Team share their thoughts on a wide variety of topics.