Teacher perceptions about observation conferences: What do teachers think about their formative supervision in one US school district?

School Leadership and Management

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 61-77

  Range, Bret G ^a   Young, Suzie ^a   Hvidston, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING   (United States)

Author keywords

formative supervision; principal supervision; supervision; teacher attitudes; teacher supervision

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874370868     PISSN: 13632434     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2012.724670     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Blase, J.R., and J. Blase. 1998. Handbook of instructional leadership: How really good principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
2. Bouchamma, Y. 2005. Evaluating teaching personnel. Which model of supervision do Canadian teachers prefer? Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 18, no. 4: 289-308.
3. Cogen, M. 1973. Clinical supervision. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
4. Costa, A.L., and R.J. Garmston. 2002. Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools. 2nd ed. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
5. Daley, G., and L. Kim. 2010. A teacher evaluation system that works. Santa Monica, CA: National Institute for Excellence in Teaching. http://www.tapsystem.org/publications/wp-eval.pdf.
6. Danielson, C. 2011. Evaluations that help teachers learn. Educational Leadership 68, no. 2: 35-9.
7. Danielson, C., and T.L. McGreal. 2000. Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
8. Daresh, J.C. 2001. Supervision as proactive leadership. 3rd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
9. Derrington, M.L. 2011. Changes in teacher evaluation: Implications for the principal's work. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin 77, no. 3: 51-4.
10. Di Paola, M.F., and W.K. Hoy. 2008. Principals improving instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
11. Donaldson, M.L. 2005. On barren ground: How urban high schools fail to support and retain newly tenured teachers. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, April 15, in Montreal, Canada. http://www.gse.harvard.edu/-ngt/Donald son-AERA-final-WebVersion.pdf.
12. Downey, C.J., B.E. Steffy, W.K. Poston, and F.W. English. 2010. Advancing the three-minute walk-through: Mastering reflective practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
13. Emstad, A.B. 2011. The principal's role in the post-evaluation process: How does the principal engage in the work carried out after the school's self-evaluation? Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability 23, no. 4: 271-88.
14. Fullan, M. 2001. Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
15. Garman, N.B. 1986. Reflection, the heart of clinical supervision: A modern rationale for professional practice. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 2, no. 1: 1-24.
16. Glickman, C.D. 1990. Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach. 2nd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
17. Glickman, C.D. 2002. Leadership learning: How to help teachers succeed. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
18. Glickman, C.D., S.P. Gordon, and J.M. Ross-Gordon. 2005. The basic guide to supervision and instructional leadership. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
19. Goldhammer, R. 1969. Clinical supervision. Special methods for the supervision of teachers. New York, NY: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston.
20. Goldsberry, L.F. 1984. The realities of clinical supervision. Educational Leadership 41, no. 7: 12-5.
21. Green, R.L. 2010. The four dimensions of principal leadership: A framework for leading 21st century schools. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
22. Hatch, J.A. 2002. Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
23. Hill, J., K. Hawk, and K. Taylor. 2001. Professional development: What makes it work? Paper presented at the NZARE Conference, December, in Christchurch, NZ. http://www. educationgroup.co.nz/Publications/ Professional%20Development%20-%20what%20makes% 20it%20work.pdf.
24. Hinchey, P.H. 2010. Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right.
25. Holland, P. 2005. The case for expanding standards for teacher evaluation to include an instructional supervision perspective. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 18, no. 1: 67-77.
26. Holland, P., and N. Garman. 2001. Toward a resolution of the crisis of legitimacy in the field of supervision. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 16, no. 2: 95-111.
27. Horng, E.L., D. Klasik, and S. Loeb. 2009. Principal time-use and school effectiveness. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice. http://www.caldercenter.org/upload/Working-paper- 34-FINAL-2.pdf.
28. Horng, E.L., and S. Loeb. 2010. New thinking about instructional leadership. Kappan 92, no. 3: 66-9.
29. Hoy, W.K., and P.B. Forsyth. 1986. Effective supervision: Theory into practice. New York: Random House. http://www.waynekhoy.com/pdfs/supervision- book.pdf.
30. Hoy, A.W., and W.K. Hoy. 2003. Instructional leadership: A learning-centered guide. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
31. Kersten, T.A., and M.S. Israel. 2005. Teach evaluation: Principals' insights and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing 36, nos. 1-2: 47-67.
32. Keruskin, T.E. 2005. The perceptions of high school principals on student achievement by conducting walkthroughs. PhD diss., University of Pittsburgh.
33. Kimball, S.M. 2003. Analysis of feedback, enabling conditions and fairness perceptions of teachers in three school districts with new standards-based evaluation systems. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 16, no. 4: 241-68.
34. Leithwood, K., K. Seashore Louis, S. Anderson, and K. Wahlstrom. 2004. How leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.
35. MacBeath, J.E. 2008. Leading learning in the self-evaluation school. School Leadership & Management 28, no. 4: 385-99.
36. Macy, N. 1988. A perspective on due process in teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 2, no. 1: 53-7.
37. Marshal, K. 2009. Rethinking teacher supervision and evaluation: How to work smart, build collaboration, and close the achievement gap. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
38. Marzano, R.J., T. Frontier, and D. Livingston. 2011. Effective supervision: Supporting the art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
39. Marzano, R.J., D.J. Pickering, and J.E. Pollock. 2001. Classroom instruction that works: Research based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
40. Marzano, R.J., T.Waters, and B.A. McNulty. 2005. School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
41. Milanowski, A.T. 2005. Split roles in performance evaluation: A field study involving new teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 18, no. 3: 153-69.
42. Nolan, J.F., and L.A. Hoover. 2008. Teacher supervision and evaluation: Theory into practice. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
43. Oliva, P.F., and G.E. Pawlas. 2001. Supervision for today's schools. 6th ed. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
44. O'Rourke, A., J. Provenzano, T. Bellamy, and K. Ballek. 2007. Countdown to the principalship: A resource guide for beginning principals. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
45. Ovando, M.N. 2001. Teachers' perceptions of a learner-centered teacher evaluation system. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 15, no. 3: 213-31.
46. Ovando, M.N. 2003. Constructive feedback to enhance teaching and learning. Paper presented at the annual conference for the Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development, March 10, in San Francisco, CA.
47. Ovando, M.N. 2005. Building instructional leaders' capacity to deliver constructive feedback to teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 18, no. 3: 171-83.
48. Ovando, M.N., and B.M. Harris. 1993. Teachers' perceptions of the post-observation conference: Implications for formative evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 7, no. 4: 301-10.
49. Owings, W.A., L.S. Kaplan, J. Nunnery, R. Marzano, S. Myran, and D. Blackburn. 2006. Teacher quality and Troops to Teachers: A national study with implications for principals. NASSP Bulletin 90, no. 2: 102-31.
50. Platt, A.D., C.E. Tripp, W.R. Ogden, and R.G. Fraser. 2000. The skillful leader: Confronting mediocre teaching. Acton, MA: Ready About Press.
51. Popham, W.J. 1988. The dysfunctional marriage of formative and summative teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 1, no. 3: 269-73.
52. Range, B.G., S. Scherz, C.R. Holt, and S. Young. 2011. Supervision and evaluation: The Wyoming perspective. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability 23, no. 3: 243-65.
53. Rooney, J. 2005. Teacher supervision: If it ain't working. Educational Leadership 63, no. 3: 88-9.
54. Rutledge, S.A., D.N. Harris, and W.K. Ingle. 2010. How principals "bridge and buffer" the new demands of teacher quality and accountability: A mixed-methods analysis of teacher hiring. American Journal of Education 116, no. 2: 211-42.
55. Sanders, W.L., and J.C. Rivers. 1996. Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Research report. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value Added Research and Assessment Center.
56. Spillane, J.P., K. Healey, and L.M. Parise. 2009. School leaders' opportunities to learn: A descriptive analysis from a distributed perspective. Educational Review 61, no. 4: 407-32.
57. Stronge, J.H. 2010. Evaluating what good teachers do: Eight research-based standards for assessing teacher excellence. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
58. Stronge, J.H., T.J.Ward, and L.W. Grant. 2011.What makes good teachers good? A cross-case analysis of the connection between teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education 62, no. 4: 339-55.
59. Sullivan, S., and J. Glanz. 2000. Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
60. Sweeny, J. 1992. The effects of evaluator training on teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 6, no. 1: 7-14.
61. Turnbull, B.J., M.B. Haslam, E.R. Arcaira, D.L. Riley, B. Sinclair, and S. Coleman. 2009. Evaluation of the school administration manager project: Executive summary. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/schoolleadership/ effective-principal-leadership/Documents/Evaluation-of-the-School- Administration-Manager-Project-Executive-Summary.pdf.
62. Ubben, G.C., L.W. Hughes, and C.J. Norris. 2004. The principal: Creative leadership for excellence in schools. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
63. Wallace, J. 1998. Collegiality and teachers' work in the context of peer supervision. The Elementary School Journal 99, no. 1: 81-98.
64. Wright, S.P., S.P. Horn, and W.L. Sanders. 1997. Teacher and classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 11, no. 1: 57-67.
65. Wyoming Department of Education. 2010. Wyoming education summary. Cheyenne, WY: WDE. http://edu.wyoming.gov/Libraries/Publications/WES-2010.sflb. ashx.
66. Wyoming Department of Education Rules and Regulations. 2011. Chapter 29: Certified personnel evaluation systems. Cheyenne, WY: WDE. http://soswy.state. wy.us/Rules/RULES/8068.pdf.
67. Yavuz, M. 2010. Effectiveness of supervisions conducted by primary education supervisors according to school principals' evaluations. The Journal of Educational Research 103, no. 6: 371-8.
68. Zepeda, S.J. 2007. Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts. 2nd ed. Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education.