Approaches Used in

Instructional Supervision

anna liza i. pineda

 Supervisory Behaviors
• Listening – by saying nothing yet being attentive to
what the teacher is talking about
• Clarifying – by replying with questions intended to give
fuller understanding of the problem
• Encouraging – by allowing the teacher to talk more
about the problem
• Presenting – by offering his/her own perceptions and
thoughts about the difficulty
• Problem Solving – by initiating a discussion to explore
solutions
 …Supervisory Behaviors
• Negotiating – by attempting to arrive at a solution
through mutual agreement
• Demonstrating – by showing how a teacher might
do an actual teaching
• Directing – by detailing to the teacher what he/she
must do
• Standardizing – by setting criteria for improvement
• Reinforcing – by using incentives for teachers to
perform better
 Characteristics of the Approaches
Non-Directive Approach
• The school head allows the teacher to take
responsibility for self-improvement in the
teaching-learning process
• Provides maximum teacher choice

 Behaviors : Listening, Encouraging,

Clarifying
 Collaborative Approach
• Allows both the instructional supervisor and the
teacher to share information and possible
practices as equals in arriving at a mutual plan
• The instructional supervisor encourages the
teachers to do groupwork together for their
professional improvement

Behaviors: Presenting, Problem-solving,

Negotiating
 Directive Informational Approach
• The supervisor provide the focus and
parameters of possible actions and the
teacher is tasked to choose from among the
supervisory suggestions

 Behaviors: Demonstrating,
Standardizing, Reinforcing
 Directive Control Approach
• The school head (SH) believes that learning is acquired
through compliance with a standard
• SH provides information and demonstrates knowledge
and skills on the teaching-learning process to the
teacher
• SH simply tells the teacher what to do. The teacher has
no choice

 Behaviors: Demonstrating, Standardizing,

Reinforcing
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPERVISORY
APPROACHES
Approach Outcome Choice
Non Directive Teacher Self-Plan Maximum Teacher
Choice

Collaborative Mutual Plan Mutual Choice

Directive Informational Leader-Suggested Plan Selected Choice

Directive-Control Leader-Assigned Plan No Teacher Choice

 Factors in Categorizing Teachers
• Level of Commitment – deeper than concern
because it includes time and effort
• Level of Abstraction – ability to translate
knowledge into activities; refers to the
teacher’s ability to think, define, and solve
problems, summarize and draw conclusions
 Commitment Continuum (Glickman, 2002)

Low High

Little concern for learners and other High concern for learners and other
teachers teachers

Little time / energy expanded Extra time / energy expanded

Primary concern is keeping one’s job Primary concern is doing more for others
 Levels of Abstract Thinking
Low Moderate High

Confused about the Can define the problem Can think of the problem
problem from different perspectives

Doesn’t know what can be Can think of one or two Can generate many
done; “Show me” possible responses to the alternative plans
problem

Has one or two habitual Has trouble thinking Can choose a plan and
responses to problems through a comprehensive think through each step
plan
Paradigm of Teacher Categories
(Glickman, 1981; Trespeces, 2003))

High

Quadrant III Quadrant IV

Analytical Teacher Professional
Level of Abstraction

Quadrant II
Quadrant I
Unfocused
Teacher Drop Out
Teacher

Level of Commitment High

Low
Quadrant I Teacher Drop Out
This teacher has a low level of commitment and a low level of abstraction

 Comes late, leaves early

 Writes sloppy lesson plan
 Uses copied or recycled lesson plans
 Does not volunteer for committee work
 Does not hold remedial coaching
 Spends teaching time on non-teaching tasks
 Complains a lot about school work
 Is often absent
 Does not do anything about pupils’ low performance
 Uses old or no teaching aids
 Has little or no knowledge about newer concepts / trends in teaching
 Detests being supervised
 Submits reports just for compliance
Quadrant II Unfocused Teacher
This teacher has a high level of commitment but a low level of abstraction
 Comes to school early, leaves late
 Often asks help from other teachers
 Has poor communication skills
 Complies with all school policies
 Welcomes supervision
 Depends on the school head/peers to solve class problems
 Is not able to come up with fresh innovative solutions to pupils’ learning problems
 Is seldom absent
 Always prepares lesson plans, although content is mediocre
 Maintains a clean and well structured classroom
 Has difficulty interpreting instructions of supervisor
Quadrant III Analytical Observer
This teacher has a low level of commitment but a high level of abstraction
 Is often late; leaves early
 Prepares lesson plans carelessly or incompletely
 Spends a lot of teaching time chatting with other teachers
 Maintains a messy and insufficiently structured classroom
 Always advises other teachers on what to do
 Talks much in meetings but avoid committee work
 Has a lot of solutions to school problems but seldom participates in solving them
 Is a rabble-rouser; agitates for reforms
 Has a lot of complaints against management
 Detests supervision
 Often breaks school policies
QUADRANT IV Professional Teacher
High Commitment, High Abstraction

 Uses original, innovative solutions to problems

 Shares knowledge and skills with others
 Helps other teachers solve their teaching-learning problems
 Volunteers for extra assignments
 Leads in school activities
 Is often consulted by peers
 Prepares model lesson plans and reports
 Is articulate in speech
 Keeps abreast of developments in education
 Implements school policies intelligently
 Coaches underachievers
Matching Supervisory Styles with Developmental Stages of Teachers
(Glickman, 2002)

High
Quadrant IV Professional
Quadrant III
Self-Directed
Analytical Teacher
Supervision
 Clinical Model
Collaborative
 Collaborative
Level of Abstraction

Peer

Quadrant I
Quadrant II
Teacher Drop Out
Unfocused Teacher
Directive Supervision
 Clinical supervision
 Intensive/Guided
Collaborative
Supervision

Level of Commitment High

Low
• WHAT – this refers to the supervisory objectives. These
objectives are derived from the identified instructional needs
of teachers. They may be numerous, some very critical; needs,
some critical refinement or modification needs, or minor, no
specific needs, or teacher-expressed interests.
• WHO - This refers to the supervisory actor who selects the
instructional needs to be addressed - - - the teacher or the
supervisor
• HOW – this is the supervisory plan to be used that matches the
instructional needs of the teachers
• FOR WHOM – it refers to the teacher type; these teachers
range from low, moderate, and high degree of commitment
and abstract thinking
 Instructional Supervisory Workplan

WHAT WHO HOW FOR WHOM

(Supervisory Objective) (Supervisory Actor) (Supervisory Model) (Teacher Type)

Instructional Supervisor Intensive / Guided Supervision Q1 Teacher Drop Out

Provide
Instructional Supervisor Directive Supervision Q1 Teacher Drop Out
instructional supervision
to identified type of
Instructional Supervisor Collaborative Supervision Q2 Unfocused Teacher
teacher to improve
and Teacher
classroom instructions
Instructional Supervisor Clinical Supervision Q2 Unfocused Teacher
through enhanced
teaching skills and Instructional Supervisor Clinical Supervision Q3 Analytical Teacher
strategies and
consequently attain Instructional Supervisor Collaborative Supervision Q3 Analytical Teacher
improved performance and Teacher
Teacher Self Directive Q4 Professionals

Instructional Supervisor Collaborative Q4 Professionals

and Teacher
 Supervisory Plan
Name of Grade / Date / Time Learning Area Needs to be Category of Type of
Teacher Section Addressed Needs Supervision to
be Extended

Anna Liza I. Gr III-2 June 10 English Presentation of Teaching Strategy Guided

Pineda lesson Supervision
Liezl I. Pineda Gr II-4 June 25 Mathematics Selection of Development of Directive
appropriate instructional plan Supervision
teaching strategy
Anna Liza F. Intal Gr I - 2 June 26 English Selection of Development of Directive
appropriate instructional plan Supervision
teaching strategy
Liezl F. Intal Gr I-4 June 26 Math Application of Questioning Directive
skills learned technique Supervision