PRACTICES AND PROBLEMS OF EDUCATIONAL SUPERVISION IN

GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOLS OF YEKA SUB CITY IN

ADDIS ABABA CITY ADMINISTRATION

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND BEHAVIORAL STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNINING AND
MANAGEMENT

BY

YONAS ABATE

JUNE, 2018

ADDIS ABABA
 Practices and Problems of Educational Supervision in

Government Secondary Schools of Yeka Sub City in Addis Ababa

City Administration

By

Yonas Abate

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Educational Planning and

Management

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters

of Arts in School Leadership and Management

Addis Ababa University

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

June, 2018
 ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND BEHAVIORAL STUDY

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND

MANAGEMENT

This is to Certify that the Thesis Prepared by Yonas Abate, entitled: Practices and Problems
of Educational Supervision in Government Secondary Schools of Yeka Sub City in Addis
Ababa City Administration and Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Masters of Education (School Leadership) Complies with the Regulations of the
University meets the Accepted Standards with Respect to Originality and Quality.

Singed by the Examining Committee

_____________________ _________________ ______________

Chairman, Dep’t

Graduate Committee Signature Date

Hussien Kedir (PhD) _______________________ _____________

Advisor Signature Date

______________________ _____________________ _____________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

______________________ _______________________ _____________

External Examiner Signature Date

 DECLARATION

I, the under signed, declared that this thesis is my original work and has not been presented
for a research work in any other university, and that all sources of materials used for this
thesis have been duly acknowledged.

Name: Yonas Abate

Signature: _____________________

Date: _________________________

This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as university advisor.

Name: Hussien Kedir (PhD)

Signature: ____________________ Date: _____________________

 Acknowledgements

I am indebted to a number of individuals who directly or indirectly contributed to the

successful completion of my MA study. I would first of all like to extend my deepest
gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Hussien Kedir for his unreserved professional support and timely
feedback in the course of my research work. I have greatly benefited from his friendly
approach, critical comments and at times seemingly simple but tough questions.

I am grateful to all members of my family, especially my mother W/ro Emawayish Abate

(Emuye) and also Ato Terefe Diro for their concern, encouragement, and other morale
support. Equally, I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to my friends Yihenew Getachew and
Bayisa Tsegaye, for their earnest support and encouragement all the way through my study.

Finally, I owe a lot to all who did their level best to provide the data and information required
to conduct the study and bring it to its end.

i
 Contents
Title Page

Acknowledgements i
List of Tables vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations viii
Abstract ix
CHAPTER ONE 1
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background of the Study .............................................................................................1

1.2. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................4

1.3. Objectives of the Study ...............................................................................................7

1.3.1. General Objective of the Study...............................................................................7

1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the Study.............................................................................7

1.4. Significance of the Study.............................................................................................7

1.5. Delimitation of the Study ............................................................................................8

1.6. Limitations of the Study ..............................................................................................8

1.7. Operational Definitions of Key Terms ........................................................................9

1.8. Organization of the Study............................................................................................9

CHAPTER TWO 10
REVIEW LTRATURE ....................................................................................................... 10

2.1. The Concepts of Educational Supervision ................................................................10

2.2. Historical Development of Educational supervision .................................................11

2.3. Objectives of Supervision..........................................................................................14

2.4. The Purpose of Supervision.......................................................................................15

2.5. Areas of Supervision .................................................................................................16

2.6. Domains of Instructional Supervision .......................................................................18

ii
 2.6.1. Curriculum Development......................................................................................18

2.6.2. Instructional Development....................................................................................20

2.6.3. Staff Development ................................................................................................21

2.7. Nature and Characteristics of Modern Supervision...................................................22

2.8. Principles of Modern Educational Supervision.........................................................23

2.9. Approaches of Educational Supervision ...................................................................24

2.9.1. Clinical Supervision..............................................................................................24

2.9.1.1. Pre Observation Conference..........................................................................25

2.9.1.2. Observation Conference ................................................................................25

2.9.1.3. Post Observation Conference ........................................................................26

2.9.2. Collegial Supervision............................................................................................27

2.9.3. Self-Directed Supervision .....................................................................................28

2.9.4. Informal Supervision ............................................................................................28

2.9.5. Inquiry based Supervision.....................................................................................28

2.10. Major Functions of Instructional Supervision.........................................................28

2.11. Contribution of Supervision for Continuous Professional Development................30

2.12. Supervisory Skills....................................................................................................31

2.13. Duties of School Supervisors ..................................................................................32

2.14. Teachers’ View on Supervision...............................................................................32

2.15. Problems Related to Approved Curriculum and Instruction ...................................34

2.16. Problems Related to Physical and Material Resources ...........................................35

2.17. Historical Development of Educational Supervision in Ethiopia............................35

2.17.1. Past Experience ...................................................................................................36

2.17.2. Present Trends.....................................................................................................38

iii
 2.18. Problems in the Practice of Supervision in Ethiopia ...............................................40

CHAPTER THREE 42
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY............................................................... 42

3.1. Research Design ........................................................................................................42

3.2. Sources of Data..........................................................................................................42

3.3. Sample and Sampling Techniques.............................................................................43

3.3.1. Sample of the Study ..............................................................................................43

3.3.2. Sampling Techniques............................................................................................43

3.4. Instruments and Procedures of Data Collection ........................................................44

3.4.1 Instruments of Data Collection ..............................................................................44

3.4.2. Procedures of Data Collection ..............................................................................45

3.5. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments ...............................................................46

3.6. Methods of Data Analysis .........................................................................................46

3.7. Ethical Consideration ................................................................................................47

CHAPTR FOUR 48
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA .......................... 48

4.1. General Characteristics of the Respondents ..............................................................48

4.2. Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data .....................................................50

4.2.1. Practice of Educational Supervision in Promoting Domains of Supervision .......50

4.2.1.1. Practices for Instructional Development .......................................................51

4.2.1.2. Practices in Curriculum Development...........................................................55

4.2.1.3. Practices in Staff Development .....................................................................58

4.2.2. Supervisory Activities Expected During Clinical Supervision.............................61

4.2.2.1. Pre-observation Conference Stage of Clinical Supervision ..........................61

4.2.2.2. Observational Stage.......................................................................................63

iv
 4.2.2.3. Post Observational Conference Stage ...........................................................65

4.2.3. Collegial Supervision............................................................................................67

4.2.4. Self-Directed Supervision .....................................................................................69

4.2.5. Inquiry Based Supervision ....................................................................................71

4.2.6. Informal Supervision ............................................................................................72

4.2.7. Perceptions Principals and Teachers on Educational Supervision........................73

4.2.8. Major Challenges Related with Practices of Educational Supervision.................76

4.2.8.1. Problems Related to the Level of Support of Educational Supervisors ........77

4.2.8.2. Problems Related to Working Environment..................................................78

4.2.8.3. Problems that Arise from Supervisors...........................................................80

CHAPTER FIVE 83
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................... 83

5.1. Summary....................................................................................................................83

5.1.1. Major Findings......................................................................................................85

5.1.1.1. Implementation of Educational Supervision .................................................85

5.1.1.2. The practices of Instructional Supervision ....................................................87

5.1.1.2.1. Clinical Supervision .............................................................................87

5.1.1.2.2. Collegial Supervision ...........................................................................89

5.1.1.2.3. Self-directed Supervision .....................................................................89

5.1.1.2.4. Inquiry-based Supervision....................................................................90

5.1.1.2.5. Informal Supervision ............................................................................90

5.1.1.3. Perceptions of Teachers and Principals about Educational Supervision.......91

5.1.1.4. Major Challenges Related with Practices of Educational Supervision .........92

5.1.1.4.1. Problems Related to Level of Support of Educational Supervisors .....92

v
 5.1.2.4.2. Problems Related to Working Environments .......................................93

5.1.1.4.3. Problems that Arise from Supervisors..................................................93

5.2. Conclusions ...............................................................................................................94

5.3. Recommendations .....................................................................................................96

Reference............................................................................................................................. 98

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

vi
 List of Tables

Tables Page

Table.1: Distribution of Respondents in the Yeka Sub-cities in 2013/14 Academic Year 44

Table.2: Characteristics of Respondents by Sex, Educational Qualification and Years of

Service ................................................................................................................. 48

Table.3: Supervisory Practices in Instructional Development ..........................................51

Table.4: Supervisory practices in Curriculum Development ............................................55

Table.5: Supervisory endeavor in Staff Development Activity ........................................58

Table.6: Supervisory Practices during Pre-observation Stage ..........................................61

Table.7: Supervisory Practices during Observation Stage ................................................63

Table.8: Supervisory Practices during Post Observational Analysis Stage ......................65

Table.9: Role of Supervisors in Collegial Supervision .....................................................67

Table.10: Role of Supervisors in Self-directed Supervision .............................................69

Table.11: Role of Supervisors in Inquiry -Based Supervision .........................................71

Table.12: Role of Supervisors in Informal Supervision ...................................................72

Table.13: Perceptions of Teachers and Principals on Educational Supervision ............. 74

Table.14: Problems Related to the level of supports of Educational Supervisions ..........77

Table.15: Problems Related to Working Environment. ....................................................78

Table.16: Problems Arises from Supervisors ....................................................................80

vii
 Acronyms and Abbreviations
AAEB Addis Ababa Education Bureau

BPR Business Process Reengineering

CPD Continuous Professional Development

EdAd Educational Administration

ESDP Education Sector Development Program

ETP Education and Training Policy

ICT Information Communication Technology

MA Master of Arts

MoE Ministry of Education

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Science

UNESCO United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

viii
 Abstract
Educational supervisors are responsible for ensuring that decisions about curriculum,
instructional strategies, assessment, and professional development are based on sound research,
best practices, and appropriate data and other contextual in formations. The purpose of this
study was therefore to analyze the practices of educational supervision; by assessing the level of
implementation and applying supervisory procedures applied, perception by principals and
teachers and the challenges faced during practice in government secondary schools of Yeka Sub
City in Addis Ababa City Administration to suggest some possible means and ways for future
improvement. Accordingly, four basic questions were raised with regard to the current practice
in the schools primed for the implementation of supervision. A descriptive survey design was
employed. Samples of schools and study participants were drawn from five schools and
education office of Yeka Sub-City Administration using random sampling and purposive
techniques. Self-developed questionnaire was employed as the main data collection instrument in
addition to interview and document analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive
statistics including mean, average mean, standard deviation and an independent sample t-test.
Qualitative data were analyzed by using narration. The findings of the study revealed that,
pertaining to major tasks (instructional development, curriculum development and staff
development) of educational supervisors was not in a position of shouldering their responsibility
sufficiently. The findings also reveal that the practices of clinical supervision was not for
assisting teachers rather conducted for appraising teachers’ performances. Moreover, the
supervisory practice has suffered from the following problems: lack of applying techniques of
supervision skills, lack of adequate number of supervisors, lack of relevant supervision manual,
lack of interpersonal or human relation skills and also less emphasis were given for supervision
activities; teachers’ perception such as fault finding and inspector and lack of interest on the side
of teachers to be supervised. Besides, lack of support to develop the spirit of collegiality and lack
of encouraging teachers for their own self professional improvement were also considered as the
major problems related with supervisory practices. Based on this, it was recommended that the
City Administration Bureau of Education take appropriate measures including supply of
adequate material and professional support to sub city and providing needed training and
administrative support for supervisors to fill their gaps in knowledge, roles and skills the
profession requires so that they would better be able to assist teachers and principals and
improved their attitudes.

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

This chapter deals with the background of the study, statement of the problem, research
questions, significance of the study, delimitation of the study, limitations of the study,
definition of key terms and organization of the study. It also reflects on the conceptual
framework and theoretical assumptions relating to the theme of the study – school
supervision.

1.1. Background of the Study

Supervisory practices in any context reflect the predominant views about the nature of
teaching, the roles of teachers and how they learn to teach. Until the 1980s, teaching was
viewed basically as transmission of predetermined knowledge to students. (De Grauwe,
2001). Teachers were charged with the responsibility of transmitting knowledge in an
uncontaminated form as possible, through scientifically tested procedures thought to be
immutable and universally applicable. Learning to teach was largely a matter of mastering
these procedures. Supervisors were employed as objective evaluators and powerful
controllers to check if teachers where indeed using the prescribed methods in their
classrooms and to take corrective measures. However, the more recent concept of teaching is
based on the assumption that knowledge is constructed, dynamic and conditional (Nelson,
1996) and teaching is an intellectually and morally complex work (Wilson, 1996).

Educational supervision plays a great role in creating and making good situational condition
to teachers and principals in the teaching learning process. The dictionary of education
defines supervision (TANE, 400) as all efforts of designated school officials towards
providing leadership to teachers and other educational workers in the improvement of
institution; involves the simulation of professional growth and development of teachers, the
selection and revision of educational objectives, materials of instruction, and methods of
teaching; And the evaluation of instruction. Supervisory practices in any context reflect the
predominant views about the nature of teaching, the roles of teachers and how they learn to
teach. Until the 1980s, teaching was viewed basically as transmission of predetermined
knowledge to students (De Grauwe, 2001). Here the word "supervision" means to guide and

1
simulate the activities of teachers, with a view to improving them, that is teaching as well as
instruction and promoting professional growth, (Monhanty, 1990).

According to Kutsyuruba, (2003 in Berhnae 2014) in the education process the role of
teachers cannot be underestimated. In addition improving teaching is a complex process in
which many elements should interact. Teachers are in the center of this improvement
process. Hence, teachers’ acceptance and interaction with the supervisory practice, therefore,
the techniques, methods, models, or processes used by supervisors at schools, provide the
catalyst for any supervisory success. The way teachers gain professional support from
instructional supervisors and the way teachers view the instructional supervision that they are
undergoing and think about it is very important in the outcomes of the supervision process.

Educational supervision in Ethiopia was introduced in the early ninety fourteen. Starting
from that, the word supervision has been used for almost three decades until it was replaced
by the word supervision. After few years, however, a shift was made again from supervision
to inspection and this arrangement had remained until the early nineties. The former
department of inspection currently has been replaced by the department of educational
programs supervision, (Segu, 2010).

The success of supervisory activities largely depends on the supervision principles. Besides it
also provides span of direction and serves as boundaries, which keep efforts and energies
confide to relative issues and activities. Principles in supervision therefore, guide the action
or thinking of the supervisor. MoE (1987 E.C:10-15) states that some of the most important
principles are supervision is cooperative effort, creative and attitudinal. However, to provide
a good supervision service is not an easy task. It requires a number of skills like prescriptive
skill, personal skills, administrative skills, human skill, process skills, and evaluation skills as
well as technical skills such as planning, directing and managing complex operation in
school.

Supervision is an essential and crucial element in the educational program of schools. This
practice can be internal and external with various responsibilities. According to MoE (1998),
educational supervision is divided in to two area of responsibility. These are internal and
external supervision. Internal supervision is done by school principals, department heads, and
unit leaders with school level. External supervision is carried out by external supervisor from

2
central, regional or city administration, zonal or in the context of Addis Ababa sub city and
Woreda levels. Educational supervision is focusing mainly on the total school improvement
and quality of education provided for the learners. Supporting this MoE (1995) mentioned
that supervision is main focus became providing support for teachers and enhances their role
as key professional decision makers in practice of teaching.

Researchers like Amberber (1975), Fekadu(1992), Zaudeh(1987) stated that Ethiopian

supervisory practices are affected by many factors. To mention, teachers have negative
attitudes towards the supervisory program, Supervisors do not apply the principles and
techniques they learned. Supervisors lack skills in human relation while, working with
teachers, lack of the necessary facilities for supervisors are a contributory factor for the
existing programs of supervising.

Ministry of Education (MoE, 1994) stated that, the Woreda Education experts or in the
context of Addis Ababa city administration, the sub city Education Office experts who were
assigned to supervision at school level were not able to solve problems. Sometimes they went
to school; they do nothing except collecting information from the hand of school principals.
But supervision would play a decisive role in accomplishing the desired objectives of school
programs. Supervision works with the teaching staff towards the solution of instruction
problems. According to MoE (2005), supervision manual, the role of supervision, in school
system is “Ensuring curriculum implementation, providing direct technical support to
teachers, providing on job training to teachers, conducting formative education program
evaluation, monitoring and evaluation.

School based instructional supervision is focusing mainly on the total school improvement
and quality of education provided for the learner. According to MoE (2010), supervision’s
main focus became providing support for teachers and enhances their role as key professional
decision makers in practice of teaching. The quality of teachers’ education is determined by
the provision of adequate supervision support from supervisors. The relation of professional
competence of teachers and the quality of education remains questionable unless due
emphasis is given from different level education officials to implement school based
instructional supervision program effectively. Borek and welks 1997 (in Tekalign,2010) said
that, one major tool for improving school effectiveness can be achieved by helping teachers

3
to acquire new instructional skills and new teaching methods to prepare organizational
change, and to increase their self-confidence and classroom efficiency. School based
instruction plays a very great role. This, school based supervision, is considered highly
beneficial for self-managing school intending to increase its effectiveness.

The current practice of educational supervision in secondary schools is challenged by lack of

human resource, supervisors’ limited skills to use different techniques of supervision, and not
good attitude of teachers towards supervisors that hinder the effective implementation of
educational supervision. Thus, the researcher focuses on practices and problems of
educational supervision on the development of teachers to assure the quality of education
because firstly, teaching learning process is a day- to-day activity, which is carried out by
teachers in schools, the problems that teachers encountered while they are teaching can also
be solved through school-based instructional supervisors; secondly, the weakening of these
services has a lot to do with the deterioration of students achievement. So, the study
attempted to seek for ways of alleviating the problems and establishing an improved system
in the implementation of educational supervision so as to enhance the overall quality of
education by enhancing students’ learning achievements and outcomes.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Supervision has been playing vital roles in the management of education activities. As stated
by Corron, 1998, (in Netsanet, 2014) educational systems rely on educational supervision to
improve instruction by improving the quality of teachers and the achievement of learners. It
has been useful in equipping teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to principals
how to lead teaching leaning process as well as overall educational activities. Research
findings related to the supervision in school indicted that there are some problems with its
practice. To list some opportunities that help to improve teaching and learning proves were
inadequate, training programs were not relevant to real professional development of teachers,
there was no systematic following up and supervisory supporting systems were not designed
properly, (MoE, 2002).

Assuring and enhancing the quality of teaching and learning has become a major concern all
over the world (Firdissa, 2009). The society and employers need those who are capable of
solving challenges and who bring quality to student learning by implementing appropriate

4
supervisory service; therefore, this expectation can be achieved through those supervisors
who are well equipped with knowledge, skill, understanding and favorable attitude.
However, most teachers in our schools do not have good attitude towards supervision. This
feeling provoked on the fact supervisors lack the experts, knowledge and skill and brought
the concept ‘who supervises who” similarly they consider them as fault finders, and who do
not have the time even to guide teachers, this concept is dangerous to the improvement of
instruction(Bogale, 2011).

According to Tekaligen (2010), educational supervision practice was hindered by the

presence of some teachers who perceived supervisory service negatively, lack of in service
training and absence experience sharing session for school supervisors, failure to organize in
service training for teachers, lack of support, insufficient budget unavailability of
experienced supervisory personnel, work load of supervisors and inadequate
communicational skills of educational supervision. In addition to this Milka (2010) also
stated that supervisor did not as enough discussion method like workshops ,symposiums,
brains forming, panel discussion, conferences and others with teachers and workers in order
to develop their competency. In addition some of the hindrances include, lack of well
organized, and focus on administrative work rather than professional lack of attention.
Teachers are not properly supported by supervisors in tackling instructional problems as well
as in implementation of new curriculum and new instructional approach. Traditionally, those
quality parameters can be extremely determined and prescribed for all schools. It is this
assumption that has led to over emphasis on the control dimension of supervision. The
primary education programmed of considers that it is only a system of continuous on-the job-
help, support and guidance to the teacher that can lead to provision of quality education in
every primary school (Govinda and Tapans, 1999).

According to many researchers, supervision is not effective in many countries. For instance,
according to Charles, (2011:20) in Kenya most supervisors do not meaningfully supervise
and evaluate teachers, plan and co-ordinate curriculum actively, manage innovation and
change or spend time in classroom. Similarly in Ethiopia, there are some problems of with
the practice of instructional supervision. According to MoE (2002), the main problems and
their practice are, opportunities that help to improve teaching and learning process were

5
inadequate, lack of professional skills, and training programs were not relevant to real
professional development of teachers and lack of budget. According to Boissiere (2004) the
concern for quality has been at the core of the motivating forces for reforms in education.
Achieving quality in education has increasingly become crucial in strategic improvement
plans of developing countries. Kochhar (2002), views that supervision includes those
activities, which are primarily and directly concerned with studying and improving the
conditions which surround the learning and growth of pupils. Similarly, it is stated in the
ETP that the main objective of the teaching-learning process in our country is to create
problem solving citizens (ETP, 1994).

One of the measures by which this quality is assured is through educational supervision; the
quality of teachers is then a must to be attained. Hence teachers need to consider instructional
objectives, content of the instruction, characteristics of teachers and learners, and specific
conditions of the instruction that can play a great role in the educational supervision before
starting to teach their students. So it is necessary to assess the current practice of educational
supervision in secondary schools and give suggest some possible ways and solutions. In light
of this, the researcher decided to undertake research to assess the current practice and
problems of educational supervision in some selected government secondary schools of Yeka
sub-city in Addis Ababa city administration.

This study tries to assess the extent/level of the problems and to address the following basic
question

1. To what level is educational supervision practiced by supervisors in government

secondary schools of Yeka sub city administration?

2. What enabling conditions exist for facilitating the practices of instructional

supervision?

3. How do principals and teachers perceive on educational supervision service in the

study area?

4. What are the major challenges involved in the implementation of educational

supervision?

6
1.3. Objectives of the Study

This study has general and specific objectives.

1.3.1. General Objective of the Study

The main objective of this study was to assess the practices and problems of instructional
supervision in government secondary schools of Yeka Sub City in Addis Ababa City
Administration.

1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the Study

The specific objectives of the study are to:

 assess the current performance of secondary school supervisors in practicing the

educational supervision technique and procedure.

 assess the professional support teachers gained from supervisors in order to improve
their instructional skills.

 indicate existing view of principals and teachers on practice of Educational

supervision; and

 sort out major challenges of supervision programs and based on the findings to
recommend the necessary ways and means of improving supervision practices at
school level.

1.4. Significance of the Study

Assessing the current practices and problems of supervisors in secondary schools has
paramount significance, which is it may help improve the supervision process in schools.
This study may help the following groups:-

1. The study may have practical significance for policy and decision makers, planners
and implementers by informing the gaps created and its magnitude in terms of the
current practice of supervision and the extent of readiness created between principals
and teachers for the practice of instructional supervision.

2. It may help the various stakeholders such as educational experts (both at bureau and
sub city levels), supervisors, principals, teachers and development partners to be

7
 aware of the unexpected but emerging negative trends and thereby take bold and swift
actions to weed out unnecessary practices and trends.

3. It may stimulate discussions and further reflections among educational experts (both
at bureau and sub city levels), supervisors, principals, teachers and development
partners for further action and the provision of supports for real transformation.

4. It may reshape or reducing the supervisors practicing to change negative attitude of

teachers and principals on supervision and supervisors.

5. To serve as a spring board to those who are interested to undertake further in-depth
investigation in the area.

1.5. Delimitation of the Study

Addis Ababa city administration has ten sub cities and the researcher focuses on Yeka Sub
City, which is one of the ten sub cities of the city administration. It situated in the North Part
of Addis Ababa, bounded from south by Bole, from West by Arada and from North and East
by Oromiya region. At present, the sub city has 13 woredas and 9 government secondary
schools. Nevertheless, conditions did not permit the writer to study all problems in all
schools. Therefore, this research was delimited to five government secondary schools of
Yeka Sub-city, Addis Ababa. In terms of content, the scope of this study was delimited to
examine practices and problems of educational supervision in government secondary schools
of the Yeka Sub city in Addis Ababa city administration.

1.6. Limitations of the Study

The student researcher does not believe that the study was totally free of any limitation.
Some of the limitations were related with respondents’ unwillingness in filling the
questionnaires, and time. Some of the respondents were not cooperative as had been
expected. As a result some respondents did not respond carefully particularly for open ended
questions. Some of the questionnaires were not collected (obtained) from teachers’
respondents. All these might have their effect on the findings of the study.

8
1.7. Operational Definitions of Key Terms

The operational definitions of terms which are used contextually in this paper are explained
here under.

Instructional Supervision: The first level management in schools which basically focused
on teaching and learning process, (Mohnty, 1990).

Principals: Under this study context is the full time administrative head and professional
leaders (directors and vice directors) in public (government) secondary school.

Secondary School: In this study it is an educational level from grade nine to grade ten
meaning first cycle of secondary school education.

Supervision: In this study supervision considered as the process of helping, guiding,

advising and stimulating teachers in order to improving instruction, learning, and
the curriculum.

Supervisors: In this study it refers to Secondary School Supervisors that coming from sub-
city education office to support and evaluate the performance of school and
teachers to improve student achievement.

Supervision practice: Refers to the practice or use of different strategies of supervision, and
procedures of class room observation.

1.8. Organization of the Study

This study would have five chapters. Chapter one deals with problem and its approach.
Chapter two consists of review of related literature. Chapter three deal with methodology and
Procedure of data collection. Presentation and analysis of data were dealt with in chapter
four. Finally, Chapter five consists of summary, conclusion and recommendation

9
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW LTRATURE

This chapter discusses relevant aspect regarding Practices and Problems of Instructional
supervision in secondary schools therefore; it treats the following major topics.

2.1. The Concepts of Educational Supervision

Supervision is a way of stimulating, guiding, improving, refreshing and encouraging and

overseeing certain group with the hope of seeking their cooperation in order for the
supervisors to be successful in their task of supervision. According to Ogunsaju
(1983),Supervision is essentially the practice of monitoring the performance of school staff,
noting the merit and demerits and using befitting and amicable techniques to ameliorate the
flaws while still improving on the merits thereby increasing the standard of schools and
achieving Educational goals. The term supervision is derived from word “Super video”
meaning to oversee, Adepoju (1998). It is an interaction between at least two persons for the
improvement of an activity. In a broad sense (Pierce and Rowell, 2005) define supervision as
a developmental process designed to support and enhance the individual’s motivation,
autonomy, awareness, and skills necessary to effectively accomplish the job at hand. It is also
a combination or integration of Processes, procedures, and conditions that are consciously
designed to advance the work effectiveness of individuals and group.

As many definitions and meanings of supervision, there are number of writers studies in the
field. According to Oliva, Peter, F (1997), contemporary definitions about supervision put a
stress on service, cooperation and democracy, and along with this they communicate that
their emphasis on instructional supervision. Instructional supervision is further defined, as
the process of working with teachers to improve classroom instruction (Oliva, Peter, F,
1997). A more comprehensive definition of supervision has been offered by Krey and Burke
(cited in Oliva, Peter, F 1997), supervision is instructional leadership that relates perspective
to behavior, classifies purposes, contributes to and support organizational actions,
coordinates interactions, provides for maintenance and improvement of the instructional
program, and assesses goals achievements.

10
Adepoju (1998) defines school supervision as the process of bringing about improvement in
instruction by working with people who are working with pupils. It has also been described
as a process of stimulating growth and a means of helping teachers to achieve excellence in
teaching. Supervision in school therefore is a vital process and combination of activities,
which is concerned with the involvement of all activities by which, educational
administrators express leadership in the improvement of teaching and learning, by
observation of classroom instruction and conducting teachers meetings and conducting a
group and individual conferences. It also involves development and execution of plans
towards increased effectiveness in the school programs and the organization and
reorganization of the curriculum. Once these activities are well undertaken, they help
teachers be more committed to maintain and improve their effectiveness in the classroom.
This leads to improved pupils performance. Okumbe (1999) points out that effectiveness of
instructional supervisors could be achieved if they were provided with the opportunity to
acquire and practice the important skills required in supervision.

2.2. Historical Development of Educational supervision

The idea of supervision is as old as mankind, but the systematic study of it is more recent. To
comprehend the modern supervisory techniques, it is important to trace supervisory trends in
the earlier periods of America and British education systems and review the development of
supervision in Kenya‘s education system. In 1654 a statute was adopted in America that
empowered selected men to be responsible for appointing teachers of sound moral and faith
as supervisors. During the period, supervision was handled by laymen, with special emphasis
placed on inspection of schools and classroom instruction. In 1654 a statute was adopted in
America that empowered selected men to be responsible for appointing teachers of sound
moral and faith as supervisors. During the period, supervision was handled by laymen, with
special emphasis placed on inspection of schools and classroom instruction, (MOEST, 2004).

There were set rules and regulations for the sake of control and standards. Supervision
concentrated on appraising the achievement of learners in subject matter and evaluation
methods used by teachers. It also involved observing the general management of the schools
and pupils conduct. This early supervisory concepts were characterized by inspection,
(Jocobson, 1973). When an educator became the supervisor or the director of instruction,

11
he/she was called the inspector. The functions of such a person were more of judicial than
executive. The supervisor made judgments about the teacher rather than the teaching or the
learning process.

In the mid-nineteenth century, the concept of supervision continued to emphasize the

inspection of schools and classrooms, with some attention being placed on assisting teachers
to improve. At the same time professional educators replaced the laymen in doing
supervision. In the early twentieth century inspection involved supervision of classroom
instruction through direct classroom observation and demonstration, with the focus being
placed on the teacher. The supervisors or inspectors were supposed to be skilled interviewers
and sympathetic listeners and also they were supposed to create a purposeful, but non-
stressful atmosphere. Therefore, the history of supervision/ inspections roles of supervisors
for improving educational program which helps teachers to achieve both qualitative and
quantitative instructional delivery from the foregoing, it could easily be deduced that
supervision is an indispensable variable in the teaching learning process as well as the overall
school and educational objectives. However, problems of parents and inadequate funding of
schools constitute a lot of crises in the system. Van Deventer and Kruger (2003) stated that
the elements of supervisory roles of principals are defining the school mission, managing the
curriculum and instruction, supervising teaching, monitoring learner progress and promoting.

In attempting to face the historical development of supervision, numerous authorities in the

field have identified distinct periods and stage, for instance, Lucio and Neil, (1979) classifies
the historical development of supervision in to five stages.

Supervision by Administration Officers: This Stages is corresponds to the first period by

spears. This stage is what Eye and Natzer (1971), also call the periods of Administrative
Inspection (1648-1875). During these stage teachers were considers as instrument to be
supervised. The supervision was requires to make Judgment about the teacher rather than the
teaching or the pupils learning. Decisions were made based on what the supervisor thought
the saw. The nature of the remedy always seemed to be that of displacing or replacing the
teacher. Supervision was related largely to the management of the pre-scribed curriculum
rather than to the improvement of instructional procedures.

12
Supervision by Specialists: According to Lucio, (1979) this occurred by the turn of century.
During this period a number of new subjects, such as music drawing, arts and handcrafts,
home economics, and Physical education part of the Curriculum. Those newly introduced
subjects required services of specialists; thus special supervisory programs started to be
organized. This stage corresponds to the second period by spears ,where educational
professionals began to replace the lay people in doing the supervisory activities .This
period of supervision by specialists, to a greater extent is ,what Eye and Netzer calls as their
second stage. The period of efficiency orientation /1876-1936/which is characterized by
“pressurized influence on teaching procedures by experts who were efficiently oriented.”

The Science of Supervision: Historically, this was the period where the world of material
production saw the possibility of scientific management and school leaders were proposing
the application organizational principles to school supervision. The period of scientific
supervision suggested that the “Best” methods of teaching were to be found and the use of
these methods was to be enforced on teachers. The qualifications of teachers of were to be
specifically defined, and it was job of supervisors to see that all met this standard
qualification. Supervisors were to discover best procedure in the performance of particular
educational tasks and give these best method to the teacher for their guidance .Under this
scientific management ,supervision was to discover “laws” of education and apply them
through teachers. Research and measurement were to be the domain of supervision .Teachers
were to apply the findings.

Supervision as Democratic Human Relations: During this period according to Lucio and
Neil, (1979) there was protect against imposition of the curriculum and methods by personal
authority of Administrative of officers. Supervision was conceived as guidance rather than
inspections .supervision was defined as “the maximum development of teachers in to the
most professional efficient he is capable of becoming”. Teachers were presumed professional
efficient when competent in self-analysis, self-criticism and self-improvement. Supervision
became associated with percepts respecting human personality and encouraging wide
participation in the formulation of policy.

Methods of Reason and Practical Intelligence: In the categorization of the historical

development of supervision, this is last stage. The method of reason rests on the belief that

13
knowledge is best of obtained through a theoretical system which serves to guide
participations and actions, Lucio and Neil, (1979). Supervisors, teachers and children are
assumed to behave rationally when the act in accord with a given set theoretical or mental
patterns which presumably relate to the characteristic of there on situations. These patterns
include assumptions about future events, knowledge of alternatives available, consequences
attached to the options, and away of ordering consequences and options by preference and
also the method of reason can be referred to as rational supervision. Modern theory of
rationally assume that member of organization are limited in their knowledge and there
capacities to learn and to solve problems. Because the mined cannot immediately grasp all
consequences, the supervisory staff must be able to help teachers toward the coordinated and
effective behavior which reflects the broader considerations of the school.

The method of practical intelligence is a method of inquiring based upon faith in the practice
of ordinary people. The teacher which is dealing with concrete situations and applying
knowledge informally, is often more intelligent than the theorist who observe only a limited
sphere because of the restriction of science. Briefly, the method of practical intelligence
requires recognitions of varying points of view and accommodation of one’s own perspective
to others. Under this method, supervisors encourage wide participations in policy
determining functions and seek to have participant see the significance of their emotions, as
well as facts. Supervisor view themselves as learners along with others in the under taking.
The intellectual experts positions in the method of practical intelligence is one of
involvement in the process of judgment in working with others. According to practical
intelligence supervision today is not the province of a particular person or positions but a
rational mode of behavior for all who work and are part of the human organization of the
school .

2.3. Objectives of Supervision

According to Monhanty (1996), cited in Bogale 2010, objectives are mainly of two kinds (1)
General objectives and (2) specific objectives. Improvement of the teaching learning process
is taken as general objectives of supervision interpreting the school programs to the
community may be regarded as one of the specific objectives supervision. On the other hand,
from the point of view of their factor, objectives can be classified in two (A) long term and

14
(B) short term. The objectives, which formulated to relate through long time, are long term
objectives, and which are to achieved within a short period are short-term objectives. For
instance, evaluating teacher’s performance in terms of pupil’s growth and educational
objectives may be taken as a long term objective and to organize an in-service training course
for making up content-deficiency of a group of primary school teacher may be regarded as
short-term objectives.

According to Bogale (2005), there are some important objectives in supervision. Some of
them are as follows:
Assisting teachers to identify and analyze learning difficulties and other educational
problems of pupils and helping them in planning suitable remedial instruction is a function of
the supervisor; Evaluating teachers performance in terms of pupils growth and education
objectives and suggests ways and means in the direction is an aim of supervision; Promoting
professional growth of all teachers through provision of service, like training courses, staff
discussion, writing and reading educational material; Identifying the various factors
responsible for promoting hindering the teaching-learning process and taking necessary steps
to utilize or control these faces is a useful task for the supervision; To asses certain
strengthen and weakness of the school and to set suitable goals or targets for progress of the
educational institution in the objectives of supervision; and To assess the growth of child and
effectiveness of the teaching learning process. In brief supervision is intended to improve the
quality of instruction by promoting the professional growth of all teachers, Mohanty (1996).

2.4. The Purpose of Supervision

Canner (1987) asserts that the quality of education programs depends on the quality of the
teacher in the school system. Hence instructional supervision should be centered on teaching
quality through selecting the best available teacher and providing for teacher‘s personal
development.

Krug,(1992) divided supervision into three major processes /categories. Quality control
where the principal (supervisor) is the first category that responsible for monitoring teaching
and learning in his/her own school through classroom inspection, touring the school, talking
with teachers and visiting students. The second category involves professional development
of teachers by helping them grow professionally and to develop their understanding of

15
teaching and classroom life, improving class teaching skills and expanding their knowledge
and the third category is teachers motivation through building and nurturing motivation and
commitment to teaching in schools overall purposes and the schools defining educational
platforms.

According to Fisher (2011), the schools supervision includes all efforts of school officials
directed to provide leadership to the teachers and other educational workers in the
improvement of instruction and the improvement of teaching and learning in schools are the
general purpose of supervision. Hence the basic premise of supervision is that a teacher’s
instructional behavior affects student learning and an examination of instructional behaviors
can lead to improvement in teaching and learning. The effective school research identifies
schooling practice and characteristics associated with measurable improvements in student
achievement and excellence among student achievement.

These “effective school practices” include elements of schooling associated with a clearly
defined curriculum; focused classroom instruction and management, firm consistent
discipline, close monitoring of student performance; and strong instructional leadership as
follows: To acknowledge that teachers are individuals and professionals with different needs
and interests.2,To define supervision as an art and science; To consider that taken together,
passion for learning and reflective practice provides modeling and the basis for individual
perception and insight; To maximize individual growth through reflective practice and
professional dialog; To provide time and support for growth and change; To encourage self-
initiated professional development; To develop an educational environment characterized by
collaboration cooperation, and communicating yielding a supportive, non-threatening
environment to foster professional growth; and To assert that all faculty have a professional
responsibility to continually learn and improve.

2.5. Areas of Supervision

Supervision is a multifaceted technique. The areas of supervision are quite varied. The
following are some of the areas:- Supervision of instructional work, supervision of co-
curricular activities programs, supervision of school environment, supervision of school
records, supervision of development aspects, supervision of pupil growth and supervision of
financial management. The supervisors from the ministry visit the schools to assess on the

16
above stated areas. During such visits, it is advisable that the supervisors inform the school
managers in advance. After the classroom visits and observation, it is important to hold
meetings and conferences with teachers to discuss their weak and strong points, and identify
opportunities for improvements noted and efforts are made to improve them. It is also
important to note that regular guidance is provided to teachers through issuing circulars
containing suggestions for improved methods of teaching and through the study of books and
journals, which contain the latest instructional and administrative techniques.

A supervisor could also be the principal of a school, or a senior member of staff of a school
(Ani, 2007). However, supervision in a school system implies the process of ensuring that
policies, principles, rules, regulations and methods prescribed for purposes of implementing
and achieving the objectives for education are effectively carried out. Igwe (2001), Viewed
that supervision involves the use of expert knowledge and experience to oversee, evaluate
and coordinate the process of improving teaching and learning in schools. Supervision,
through supporting teachers, controlling schools, functioning and allowing for regular
exchanges between schools, can be a powerful tool for quality improvement. This is rarely
the case in Africa, probably even less so than elsewhere. Research on school supervision in
Africa (De Grauwe 2001; Gurnam 2010; and Dull 1981) shows the lack of satisfaction
among teachers and supervisors with the impact of supervision on the classroom.

The effective improvement of instructional delivery and maintenance of standards in the

school system are enhanced through regular internal and external supervision. According to
Netsanet (2014) argued that secondary schools in Addis Ababa city administration are
presently supervised by two categories of people, viz: (i) internal supervisors those within-
the school, supervisors as principals, vice-principals and heads of departments: (ii) external
supervisors those outside the school, supervisors as the formally designated officials from the
city education buearo and sub city education offices. The primary responsibility of
supervisors is to see that high standards are maintained and that schools are run in
accordance with the laid down regulations. The supervision of personnel and materials in
order to ensure the set minimum standards are attained, sustained and seen to meaningful
impact on society.

17
The supportive and educative process of supervision is aimed toward assisting supervisees in
the application of theory and techniques to their works (Association for Counselor Education
and Supervision, 2003). Numerous developmental models of supervision have been proffered
in an attempt to further advance the sound application of supervisory services (Wilson,
1996). Developmental models of supervision have in common a focus on supervisee change
from novice to experienced professional through a delineated stage process with
representative challenges facing supervisees at each level. The characteristics of each
developmental stage afford supervisors the opportunity to enhance effectiveness through
interventions aimed at facilitating further supervisee development Wilson, (1996).

According to ( MoE, 2014/15), the current explosion of students population coupled with the
attendant increased complexity of the school organization and the introduction of the
Universal primary education program of education in the country has indeed necessitated a
greater attention of supervision more than ever before. This is more so because school
supervision occupies a unique place in the entire education system. Just as the personality of
each supervisor differs from the other, the supervisory strategies adopted are varied and so
their effects on the educational system.

2.6. Domains of Instructional Supervision

There are three large domains with in which supervisors can work: instructional
development, curriculum development and staff development. In any one or all of these areas
the instructional supervisor can provide variety of assistance service to teacher. For example,
a supervisor who works as a group leader in curriculum development may at the same time
work in the domain of instructional development and/or the domain of staff development.

2.6.1. Curriculum Development

Any government in this world has its own unique goals and objectives that have been
embedded to the philosophical foundations of the nation. What the nation wants to transmit
to its people, it has to be put in schools curriculum. This is done through various educational
policies, directives and seculars. School supervisor are to ensure such educational policies,
directives, seculars and the societal goals and objectives are properly implemented. As stated
Ibrahim Baba (2015), in Nigeria for example, after independence the leading education
philosophy was education to foster the worth development, of the individual, for each
18
individual's sake and for general development of the society, which Nigeria still claim to
follow. So, a Nigeria National Curriculum is a document in which the government has put
what should be learnt in schools. School supervisors are the ones to ensure that schools
follow what have been planned as objectives to be attained.

Curriculum development is cooperative activity, by the teacher and supervisor with a view,
to making learning experience of students worthwhile and updates Mohanty, (1990).
Curriculum development as defined by Harris, (1963) is a task of supervision directing
activities towards designing or re-designing that which is to be taught, by whom, when,
where and in what pattern. Glikman et.la. (2004) defined curriculum development as the
revision and modification of the content, plans, and materials of classroom instruction. Other
defined curriculum development by looking its process as it involves three interdependent
processes; curriculum planning, curriculum actualization and curriculum evaluation (Lovell,
1983).

Supervisor has several responsibilities in the process of curriculum development. He/she may
initiate teacher to identify curriculum problems or suggest problems that might be interest to
them to be studied, provide time, facilities, and resource when teachers perform their task of
curriculum development. Unless the supervisors discharge his/her responsibility for the
initiation of change, and ingredient resource is made available to the teacher, the task of
curriculum development may remain static and hence, deliver an outmoded and irrelevant
curriculum to its students. Therefore, the supervisor needs to provide necessary resources and
able to motivate and coordinate staff members to enable them contribute and become keen
participants in the school curriculum development so as to deliver relevant curriculum
content to their students. The above idea is more elaborated by (Lovell, 1983), that
supervisor found itself confronted with the task of assisting in the decision as to describe
changes, assisting in innovation, supplying the many type of resource help necessary
innovation, coordinating the incorporations of innovations in to the program in such a way
that students program would have continuity, assessing in the evaluation of innovation, help
the staff become aware of the variety of alternatives that seem most appropriate in the
system, and developing a plan and design that would determine the type of innovation to be
supported financial.

19
Generally, (Lovell, 1983), described several responsibility of supervisors with respect to
curriculum development in to four general kinds of responsibility: to provide blue print of
what the curriculum in that school may look in the future: to develop hypothesis that are
important to explore either through research or demonstration: to support and assist in
research and demonstration: and to facilitate the maintenance of quality ongoing instruction.
Thus, in doing so, supervisor must possess research skills, know how to help teachers
develop curriculum materials and proposal, be able to analyze research and interpret findings
to teachers.

2.6.2. Instructional Development

It is important for the supervisors to supervise curriculum programs and give effective advice
on programs that will improve teaching and learning in schools. This will enable the
supervisor to identify specific curriculum needs and prepare a supervisory plan that would
promote teacher student achievement. The supervisor is responsible for ensuring syllabus
coverage, ensuring that teaching is appropriate for the needs of both girls and boys,
identifying curriculum needs, establishing and maintaining the quality of teaching/ learning
(MoE, 2003).

According to Kasahun (2014), instructional development involves what teachers perform in

the instructional process and the leadership role that supervisors should exercise to help
teachers perform their tasks of teaching effectively. Emphasizing this, Eye and Netzer
(1965), instructional development mainly includes all those activities involved in the whole
process of directing learning, will be planning for instruction, the selection and use of various
types of teaching and learning aids, the selection and use of those technique which provides
an evaluation of the result of teaching learning activities. The supervisor’s function thus, is to
assist teachers in developing and improving instructional skills and the supervisor may help
teachers in the selection of appropriate resources and strategies of presentation as well as by
helping them to organize their presentations.

The supervisor can also play significant role in helping teachers to develop skills of applying
different assessment and measurement techniques. Therefore, instructional supervision in
enhancing development and improvement has a paramount importance. Instructional
supervision can be considered as an effort to interact directly with teacher to provide

20
services. Generally, supervisors are expected to know how to analyze teaching, diagnose
difficulties, confer with teacher and make meaningful recommendations to the teacher for
improvement. They are required to bring skills in pedagogy and human relations in the
process of instruction and instructional improvement particularly in clinical supervision.
Therefore, by skillfully analyzing the performance of teachers, the supervisor can provide a
meaningful feedback and direction to teachers that can have a profound effect on the students
learning that occur in the classroom.

2.6.3. Staff Development

Supervisors have come under pressure, several times on their effect on staff performance.
However, no matter what criticisms are leveled against them, their contributions cannot be
over emphasized. If supervisors have the responsibility of improving staff performance by
equipping them with knowledge, interpersonal skills, and technical skills then one will say
that organizations cannot do without supervisors’ involvement. Mills,(1997) asserted that
supervision has direct effect on staff performance. Supervision gives the right direction to
people under supervision to enable them to take initiative and responsibilities to go ahead on
their own. Supervision seeks to equip individuals with the necessary knowledge, attitudes
and skills to make them useful.

According to Wiles (1967) supervision is an effective tool that could be used to promote
good results as far as staff performance is concerned. It is also acknowledged that there is
always a link between supervision and effective work, but this will be perfectly true only
when the needed resources and commitment are available and are put to judicious use. Also
the significance of supervision for enhancing the performance of staff in an organization
cannot be ignored in the developmental process of any country.

Supervision has been defined in various ways by different authors to suit their audience.
Tanner, (1994) perceive supervision as a vital aspect of organized education. This statement
is evident in everyday business. Often, men strive to offer the best supervision to sustain
workers’ interest for increase productivity. Therefore, staff development is one major
domains of instructional supervision which involves well organized in-service programs like
seminar, workshop, conference and school based discussions. In line of this, Glickman and
et.al (1998) emphasized that any experiences that enlarges teachers’ knowledge,

21
appreciation, skills and understanding of his/her work falls under the domain of professional
development.

As Harris, (1975) in-service education defined as a task of supervision, directing activities

towards the promotion of growth of instructional staff members to make them more efficient
and more effective. It specifically seeks to improve education by changing people. The role
of instructional supervisor here, therefore, is much more to initiate staff members, plan, and
facilitate conditions making appropriate decisions and deliver effective staff in service
programs.

2.7. Nature and Characteristics of Modern Supervision

Good supervisors seem to have many of the same qualities of good teachers and good
counselors. They are empathic, genuine, open, and flexible. As they respect their supervisees
as persons and as developing professionals, and are sensitive to individual differences (e.g.,
gender, race, and ethnicity) of supervisees. They are comfortable with the authority and
evaluative functions inherent in the supervisor role, giving clear and frequent indications of
their supervision of the counselor’s performance. Even though, good supervisors really enjoy
supervision, are committed to helping the counselor grow and evidence commitment to the
supervision enterprise by their preparation for and involvement in supervision sessions.
These supervisors’ evidence high levels of conceptual functioning, have a clear sense of their
own strengths and limitations as a supervisor, and can identify how their personal traits and
interpersonal style may affect the conduct of supervision.

Mohanty (cited in Bogale, 2010) also stated all human beings in the educative process-
students, teacher, administers and supervisors are individuals of worth endowed with unique
talents and capabilities. The primary aim of supervision must be to recognize the inherent
value of each person; to this and that all will be realized. The philosophy of democracy, the
psychology of group dynamics, interpersonal relationship, professional leadership, etc have
left enable important on the theory and practice of modern supervision. In the democratic
social order, education is dynamic force. Hence supervision becomes dynamic in character.
According to Mohanty ( in Bogale,2010), some characteristics of modern supervision are: it
is democratic and co-operative in spirit and organization, it established on the maintenance of

22
satisfactory interpersonal relationship, it must be communicative, it is creative,
comprehensive in scope, scientific and experimental and Auto-critical

2.8. Principles of Modern Educational Supervision

Principles are schemes, guidance’s or laws, concepts, general truths which govern action or
which underline every observable activities. Accordingly, some basic principles of
supervision in warded by scholars Haileselassie (1997), Ayer and et.al (1954), and Melchoier
cited in Amberber (1975) include supervision should be theoretically sound, creative,
attitudinal, cooperative, scientific and democratic.

Supervision should be theoretically sound because this principle emphasizes sensitive to

ultimate values, aims and policies with special reference to their adequacy “fact ness” and
laws, with special emphasis given to accuracy and change and development should be
sensitive to change and development; hence and methods in terms of changing values,
clarified aim, and policies; Supervision should be creative means it should seek latent talents;
provide opportunity for the exercise of originality and for the development of unique
contributions. It should shape and manipulate the environment.

Supervision is also attitudinal and this implies that it is attitude of the supervisor and his
ability to develop completely some and constructive attitudes in coworkers determines the
effectiveness of supervision; Supervision is cooperative because it’s principles stead of
directing attention only to the improvement of individual teachers, the cooperation efforts of
the entire staff in the study of educational problems of schools is important; Supervision
should be Scientific and this implies that supervision critical methods in studying improving,
and evaluating, anything within its province, including its own materials and procedures. It
should drive and use data and conclusions, which are constantly more objective, more
precise, sufficient, impartial, more expertly secured, and more systematically organized and
finally, Supervision should be democratic because this suggests that supervision should
provide full opportunity for co-operation and participation as well as for substation of leader
ship for authority.

23
2.9. Approaches of Educational Supervision

Supervision is one of the administrative tools which individuals as well as groups of people
employ in the day-to-day administration of their work or organizations (Nyarko, 2009) and
for Segun (2004) the importance attached to school supervision in modern educational
systems requires a lot of attention because many people are currently more conscious than in
the past about the essence of education. As a result, there is a great interest in the day-to-day
operations of the school system (Bessong and Ojong, 2009). According to Olive and Pawla
(1997), stated there are varieties of options to supervisory approaches. In considering how
class rooms should be organized, which teaching style to use, working arrangements for
teachers, scheduling options, and methods of supervision, priority should be given to
diversity than uniformity of approaches.

Diversity in teaching styles, patterns of classrooms organization and interpretations of

curriculum increases the range of possibilities and encourages learning among teachers.
Teachers bring differences caused by abandoning commitment to one best supervisory and
evaluation system and to maintained supervisors prepare plan for supervision that includes at
least five options can be developed. These are clinical supervision, collegial supervision,
self-directed supervision, informal supervision, and inquiry based supervision.

2.9.1. Clinical Supervision

According to Cogan cited in (Olive and Pawla, 1997), clinical supervision defined as: - The
rational and practice designed to improve teachers’ classroom performance. It takes its
principal data from the events of the classroom. The analysis of these data and the
relationship between teachers and supervisor form the basis of the program, procedures, and
strategies designed to improve the students´ learning by improving the teacher’s classroom
behavior. Clinical supervision focuses on the improvement of teachers´ performance through
direct interaction of supervisors and teachers in natural setting. It is devoted to diagnosis and
formative evaluation (Adama university supervision manual, 2007).

As to landers and Myeres (1977), the assumption of clinical supervision techniques seems to
take into account is state as follows: 1, Teachers have different styles of teaching and
different levels of awareness. Therefore, they require different attention and supervision.2,
Instruction is a complex interaction. It is capable of being analyze and subject to explanation
24
and 3, an individual cannot be a fully effective autonomous teacher until he or she
understands the variables in the teaching activities.

The objective of clinical supervision, as to Krajewski (1993) is to help teachers to modify

existing of teaching in ways that make sense to then. The techniques and procedures of
instructional supervision is different from author to author. For example, Schnider and Fisher
(1988) make it five While Hailesselassie (1977:28-30 and Gold hammer,1969) suggests that
there are three major steps or stages of clinical supervision; pre observation conference,
observation of teaching and post observation conference.

2.9.1.1. Pre Observation Conference

A pre observation conference is a face-to face talk between teachers and supervisor prior to
the supervisors visit to the teachers’ classroom and its purpose is to settle on necessary
preliminaries. Therefore, the two participants to the Conference have already agreed or
assumed that the supervisor will visit the teacher and observe the teacher´s performance.
Ideally, the teacher is as desirous of having the supervisor visits as the supervisor is of
making the visit. Whether the teacher looks forward to help of this nature from the supervisor
will depend up on whether a feeling of this nature from the supervisor will depends on
whether a feeling of mutual respect have been developed between the two. Conceivably,
clinical supervision can be carried on without the existence of mutual respect but in that
event. The cycle is perfunctory, resented by the teacher, and doomed to failure. Though we
would limit the concept of peer supervision to assistance given by one teacher to another, the
clinical supervisor should be a peer in the best sense of the term.

At the end, in pre observation conference, the teachers and supervisor together should decide
what class the supervisor will visit and when thus, the supervisors schedule is set in advance.
At the pre observation conference, the teachers will identify special teaching problem s she
or he is encountering and with which he she would like some help. Thus, the two participants
focus on specific teacher and student behaviors that the supervisor will observe.

2.9.1.2. Observation Conference

It is the most common type of supervisory technique and has been in observation for years
the improvement of teaching and learning. The supervisors involved in a classroom

25
observation need to assess the purposes, and related contributory elements in light of the
present. Classrooms observation demands specific skills and professional competencies
.supervisors that are in the Competent and conceive rating to be their primary objective will
cause teachers to fear the supervision help. In addition to this, teachers consider supervisors
as faultfinders.

Regarding to these, Willes, (1963:259) point out that “observation as a phase of rating is a
procedure that restricts the improvement of teaching. Therefore, the unwise use of this
technique aggravates the negative attitude of the educational towards the program.

The purpose of classroom observation is the function of supervisor to help teachers diagnose
the causes of some teaching problems and find solution. So that, the central purpose
observation is to assist teachers make the learning process practical and stimulate pupils
learning.

The Supervisor enters the classroom, preferably at the start of a lesson, sit-down at the back
of the room, watches for a half-hour to an hour, makes notes, gets up, and leaves. Yet
Classroom observation demands a high level of technical and analytical skills. The
supervisory must know what to look for; how to look; how to collect; analyze; and interpret
the data. Garman (cited in olive and Powla; 1997) identified five modes of inquire to be
practiced by the supervisor; discover, verification, explanation, interpretation, and evaluation.
Each mode fulfills a different purpose, uses different methods of collecting data- Some
quantitative and some qualitative requires different treatments.

2.9.1.3. Post Observation Conference

Post observation or follow up conference phase is believed to be the difficult and most
important in the entire cycle. The major purpose of the post observation conference is to give
feedback to the teacher about his/her performance. Currently, perspective teachers can think
through and make an analysis of their own performance. The discussion at the follow up
conference should focus on the data collected by the supervisor, not on the supervisors
experience, biases, and feeling. The supervisor most takes every precaution to keep the
conference from being a treating situation to the teacher. Therefore, the proper subject of the
conference is the teaching observed by the supervisor.

26
Snyser (in Bogale, 2010), describes the post observation supervisory service is a joint
analysis of the use fullness of the foregoing observation results. Supporting the same idea,
Harris, (1985,160) noted that the main purpose of post observation is to determine hate
follow up activities that are useful in recording of data analysis, a plan for feed back to the
teacher.

Dull cited in Bogale (2010, 15) indicates that supervisor- teacher conference must take place.
Soon after the classroom observation, the conference should be cooperative venture in which
the teacher and the inspection and striving to come up with ways and means to the instruction
of pupil of better quality. The conference, the teacher might be promoting to evaluate the
lesson and provide explanations to Justify, for example, the use of instructional resources and
methods. The teacher also point out some aspects of the instruction, which went well, and
those, which need improvement. The post observation has maximum chance for success, it
both the teacher and supervisor and supervisor manifest a sense confidence in their own
roles. Successfully conference cannot occur without a feeling of rapport, which the
supervisor should have established with the long before initiating the cycle of clinical
supervision.

Clinical supervision may be too much supervision for some teachers. That is not all teachers
will need such an intensive look at their teaching. More over teachers´ needs and
dispositions as well as learning styles vary. Clinical supervision may be suitable for some
teachers but not for other teachers when these differences taken into consideration. Hence
supervisors need to carefully think identify those teachers that can benefit from this intensive
process, and determine how often to use it.

2.9.2. Collegial Supervision

The second approach of supervision is collegial supervision. collegial supervision is

determine as “moderately formalized process by which two or more teachers agree to work
for their own professional growth ,usually by observing each other’s class room ,giving each
other feedback about the observation and discussing shared professional concerns”.
Collegial supervision develop inter depends among teachers, and when teachers view it as an
integral part of their professional responsibility to help others and to seek help from others
when needed.

27
2.9.3. Self-Directed Supervision

Self-directed or individualized supervision teachers working alone assume responsibility for

their own professional development. The teachers assess their own teaching and identity
need for improvement. After prioritizing their needs, they develop an easily, plan that
includes targets or goals derived from an assessment of their own needs. Teachers do have
freedom to set the plan in the way like it to be but supervisors should be responsible for
insuring that the plan and selected improvement targets are provide some sort of elimination,
(Serioven and starrated, cited in segu 2010).

2.9.4. Informal Supervision

Informal supervision is another form of supervisory strategy; which is supervisory visits the
teachers without plan with classroom and out of classroom. A according to Sergiouanni cited
in Segu, (2010), “it is characterized by frequent informal visits to teachers’ class room,
conversations with teachers about their work, and other informal activities”. Typically, no
appointments are made and Classroom visits are not announced. Informal supervision,
teachers should be involved in at least one another approach such as clinical, collegial, and
self-directed, or inquiry based supervision.

2.9.5. Inquiry based Supervision.

Another supervisory option can represent an individual initiative or a collaborative effort as

pairs or teams of teachers work together to solve problems. According to Leeper, cited in
Kedir (2010, 15) explain, “Supervision and action research are the indispensable guardian of
teachers growth”. The prime purpose of action research is to alter the practice of the
researches themselves.

2.10. Major Functions of Instructional Supervision

The tasks of Supervision are the actual thing or functions and supervisors are supposed or
expected to carry-out in order to realize the objectives of supervision. Harries (in Oliva, and
Power, 1997) has described the major tasks of supervision developing curriculum, organizing
for instruction, providing staff, facilities and materials, arranging in- service education,
orienting staff members and special pupil service, developing public relation and finally,
evaluating instruction.

28
Developing Curriculum: Designing or redesigning that which is to be taught by whom, when,
where and in what pattern. Developing units and instituting new courses are examples of this
task area, Organizing for instruction: Making arrangements were by pupils, staff objectives in
coordinate and efficient ways. Grouping of students planning class scheduling assigning
spaces, allocating time for instruction, scheduling, planning events, and arranging for
teaching team are examples of the endeavors associated with this task area.

Providing staff implies that assuring the availability of instructional staff members’
inadequate numbers and with appropriate competencies for facilitating instruction.
Recruiting, Screening, selecting, assigning, and transferring staff are endeavors in this task
area, Providing Facilities: Designing or redesigning and equipping facilities for instruction.
The development of space and equipment specifications is included in this task area,
Providing materials: Selecting and obtaining appropriate materials for use in implementing
curricular designing previewing evaluating, designing and finding way to provide appropriate
materials are included in this task area.

The tasks of supervisors also include arranging in-service education because she/he obliged
to planning and implementing learning experiences that will improve the performance of
staff in instruction related matters. This involves workshops, consultations, field trips, and
training sessions as well as formal education, orienting staff members: Providing staff
members with basic information necessary to carry our assigned responsibilities. This
includes getting new staff members acquainted with facilities, staff, and community but it
involves keeping the staff informed of organizational development and developed Relating
special pupil services:- Arranging for careful coordination of services to children to ensure
optimum support for the teaching process. This involves developing policies, assigning
priorities, and defining relationships among services personnel to maximize relationship
between services offered and instructional goals of the school.

Finally, the tasks supervisors on developing public relations means they provide for a great
flow of information on matters of instruction to and from the public while securing optimum
levels of involvement in the promotion of better instruction and evaluating instruction
implies that Planning, organizing and implementing procedures for data gathering, analysis,
and interpretation, and decision making for improvement of instruction.

29
2.11. Contribution of Supervision for Continuous Professional Development

The other basic task of supervisors are implementing the continues professional development
of teachers (CPD).According to MOE Continuous professional development (CPD) manual,
the aim of continuous professional Development is to improvement is to improve the
performance of teachers in the classroom in order to raise student achievement and learning.
It is a career-long process of improving knowledge, skills and attitudes, centered on the local
context and particularly classroom Practice.

In order to fulfill the above CPD aim, Effective supervision is necessary. This means
supervisors should helping teachers to grow and to develop their understanding of teaching
and learning process and improving their teaching skills According to MOE Continuous
professional development(CPD) manual(2009,9) ,continuous professional development
practice is concerned with staff collaboration, breading of pedagogical and subject matter
knowledge strengthen relationships between scholars and research institutions, minimizing
the gap between professional requirements and limitations in preserves teachers training and
focuses on empowerment and responsiveness to local needs and demand for higher quality of
education.

According to MOE Continuous professional development (CPD) manual (2009, 9) the most
effective skill CPD has the following characteristics:

Improving the teacher’s performance in the classroom:- It covers a wide range of activities,
both formal and informal. It is integrated into the work of the teacher, not an ‘add on’. It is
based on real situations, ongoing over time with assistance and support as required.

It is based on classroom practice: CPD needs to be conducted in school settings and linked to
school wide efforts. Teachers work with each other, observing each other, planning lessons
together, team teaching and undertaking action research together. The importance of
teachers talking together about their practice cannot be exaggerated. These processes need to
be frequent and regular within the school.

It deals with subject content and teaching strategies: Teachers can only improve their
classroom practice if they work on their understanding of the subject allied with a variety of
teaching strategies that enable students to learn better.

30
It has clear procedures for identifying and aligning training needs: CPD in all countries
attempts to meet needs at a number of levels: that of the individual teacher, that of the school,
and that of the nation. Institutions must have a clear structure for identifying CPD priorities.
It is important to have an annual CPD plan to meet the needs and priorities and the range of
activities required. National priorities need to be shared with all teachers and integrated into
the work of the institutions with their own priorities.

It identifies and makes use of excellent classroom practitioners: The use of ‘expert teachers’
to work with colleagues within their own school and with other schools has been very
successful in both developed and developing countries. It is most effective when the ‘expert
teacher’ remains within the institution and it recognizes the importance of informal systems
within institutions and the locally available resources.

CPD activities model the processes, which are being learned because CPD, particularly in
developing countries, is often concerned with introducing new behavior and attitudes often
radically different from previous experience, then CPD activities must clearly reflect this.
Teachers learn more effectively through active learning and learning by doing than through
lectures and direction. Thus active learning, participation, and involvement must be part of
the CPD process if these are the intended principles.

2.12. Supervisory Skills

The supervisory must have supervisory skills observing, planning, assessing, and evaluating
instructional improvement and the skills required by supervisors are: Pedagogical Skills:
These lots of professional skills are required for supervision in schools. According to
Olowoye (1989), these skills can be classified into eight major groups. Such as mastery of
subject matter, teaching methods, improvisation, presentation of content, preparation of
lesson notes, lesson plans and units etc.

Supervisory skills describing as Evaluation Skills: These include questioning, continuous

assessment and examination skills, Disciplinary Skills: These include class control,
punishment, use of rules and regulations and maintenance of order, Motivational Skills:
Issues bordering on rewards and reinforcement are emphasized. Reportorial Skills:
Documentation of report card, class register, log book, attendance book etc. Managerial

31
Skills: These are skills on time management, good use of teaching aids, difficult situation,
and students’ behavior.

In addition to the above skills of supervisors, Interactive Skills:- Creation of rapport,

teacher’s personality and general characteristics, cooperation etc. and, Analytical Skills:-
Possession of mathematical ability, statistical computation and interpretation of data etc. The
importance of acquiring these skills cannot be left to chance or in the hands of charlatans or
mediocre. This informs the need to improve on the skills of school supervisors in order to
achieve the objectives of primary education in Nigeria.

2.13. Duties of School Supervisors

In a nutshell, the responsibilities of the heads supervisors could be outlined. According to

Guynm (1981) Strategies for Improving Supervisory Skills for Effective secondary
Education are: Helping teachers and stimulating curriculum improvement, Emphasizing the
use of group process with teachers, students and other school personnel, Performing
administrative functions only to help instruction through in-service and Teaching of teachers
for improving instruction through in service.

Igwe (2001) noted that supervision involves evaluation, monitoring and quality control for
the purpose of curriculum and infrastructural development and improvement. In order to
achieve this, some specific tasks of the supervisor in a modern school have been identified
and listed as follows: Helping school head teachers to understand students better, Helping
teachers and individuals for professional growth, Acquiring cooperating spirit for team work,
Making better use of teaching materials, Improving methods of teaching, Improving
teacher’s appraisal of his standards, Faculty plan for curriculum improvement.

The common denominator in the objectives of supervision as outlined above is to help

teachers become more effective in planning their class work in terms of utilizing maximally,
textbooks and other basic materials and curricular aids as well as helping teachers with
guidance

2.14. Teachers’ View on Supervision

A generally held perspective of supervision is to bring about improvement in the

instructional program. Teachers understanding this concept give argument to, “who should

32
supervise”. According to Gorton, Schender and Fisher (1988), in recent years increasing
number of teachers have developed mixed feeling about teacher-supervisor. Many teachers
question whether they need to be supervised. They take the position that, when they were
hired, the school apparently thought they were good teachers, and since then, they have
continued to improve themselves to the point that they no longer need to be supervised.
Besides they argue that, whatever limited improvement may still be needed can be
accomplished on their own without supervision by a supervisor or principal especially since
most principals lack the expertise for supervision.

In light of this views of teachers Gorton, Schneder and Fisher (1988) forward three reasons
why teachers have a negative feeling on teacher-supervision: the first is most principals lack
the expertise for supervising teachers. The second is the typical principal possesses limited
knowledge and skills in most areas of the curriculum and methodology, and the third is
questions are raised about whether a principal or supervisor really has the time, given all
other administrative responsibilities.

Teacher’s resentment toward supervisors continued to be a major barrier in achieving benefit

from the practices of supervision and also teachers’ perceptions of supervisors were negative,
and teachers believed that supervisors were not of any valuable assistance; supervision was
used as a means to control exert power. In case of that the attitudes of teachers & principals
towards instructional supervision is negative even if they know the critical use fullness of
supervision in teaching learning process. Supervision in school had two main components.
The first is that much of what occurs in the name of supervision in the schools (the
transactions that takes place between supervisor and teacher constitutes a waste of time, as
teachers set it. In many instances, the best evaluation that teachers give of their supervision is
that it is not harmful. The second is that the character of relationship between teachers as a
group and supervisors as a group can be described as a private cold war.

Neither side trusts the other or each side is convinced of the correctness of process, Blumberg
(1980). Thus; for school principals to do an adequate job of supervising teachers, it is
recommended that someone who has the time, instructional expertise should do it, and
human relation skills needed to help them improve as professional.

33
2.15. Problems Related to Approved Curriculum and Instruction

It is important for the head teacher to supervise curriculum programs and give effective
advice on programs that will improve teaching and learning in schools. This will enable the
head teacher to identify specific curriculum needs and prepare a supervisory plan that would
promote teacher student achievement. The head teacher is responsible for ensuring syllabus
coverage, ensuring that teaching is appropriate for the needs of both girls and boys,
identifying curriculum needs, establishing and maintaining the quality of teaching/ learning
(MoE, 2003).

Sergiovanni and Starrat (1979) developed five administrative subtasks of supervisor in the
area of curriculum and instruction. These are:
Develop the philosophy of education and objectives consistent with that philosophy:- here
the supervisor involves the review of the past and application of the present in order to shape
the future of the youth. This way the supervisor gives direction to the school to offer a
suitable approved and diversified curriculum in accordance to the guidelines of the ministry
of education and supporting organizations.

Construct programs to fulfill these objectives: - The supervisor is involved in the

development of curriculum guides where teachers prepare schemes of work and lesson plans
as per the school timetable.

Continual appraisal of curriculum and instruction: - The supervisor is concerned with

evaluation of instructional resources and overall assessment of the curriculum and
instructional programs. It involves visiting, observing and keeping a record of learning
sessions in classrooms as well as checking periodically pupils ‘exercise books to ensure
systematic use in guiding learning,

Engender a climate which displays a readiness for change. Okumbe (2001) observes that the
supervisor does this by establishing an enabling environment for teaching and learning
process to take place through encouraging healthy interpersonal relationship within the
school. By interacting with pupils and teachers, the supervisor creates a happy working
atmosphere in the school.

34
Provision of support materials for curriculum and instructional activities: - The head teacher
provides teachers with instructional materials in time and the provision of opportunities to
learn off the job by attending seminars and in service courses. The head teacher has to be
service to the teachers by giving the resources and promoting the academic and professional
status of the teachers. The breadth and depth of the primary school curriculum keeps on
changing from time to time. There is lack of funds to meet the demands of the ever changing
primary school curriculum and instruction. There is also lack of in-service training in the
current curriculum innovation.

2.16. Problems Related to Physical and Material Resources

Most programs of instruction and student service require some physical facilities including
school buildings and grounds, equipment needed in and essential to instruction, Olembo et al
(1992). One of the duties of the head teacher in Kenya is to manage the schools facilities
bearing in mind where to house the educational program, the population to be served by the
facility and ensure that financial resources are readily available for the school expansion.
Inyienga (1997) observed that the resources and facilities that a school would need for the
achievement of a school‘s mission are qualified teaching staff, support staff, physical
facilities, textbooks, furniture stores and enough playgrounds. There is acute shortage of
physical facilities and equipment in many primary schools. The problem of insufficient
educational facilities, equipment and supplies lead to over use of some of the facilities that
are available in the schools. Most schools lack enough classrooms which lead to
overcrowding of students during learning. Olembo et al (1992) contends that the head teacher
must ensure that all the physical facilities in the school are available and well maintained.
Such facilities include: - classrooms, offices, stores, workshops and sanitation. The head
teacher must make plans to repair the existing facilities or erect new ones as per the needs of
the school on time.

2.17. Historical Development of Educational Supervision in Ethiopia

Research on education systems in developing nations has shown that given the chronic lack
of resources from the central level, the traditional inspection system functions poorly.
Supervisors are often inadequately trained to help implement policy, and manage
professional development and in-service training; they often have no means of transportation

35
to travel to schools and inspection visits to classrooms are infrequent Lockheed and Verspoor
(1991). Moreover, experience has indicated that those closest to the school and classrooms
are more effective supervisors. Studies on effective schools indicate that the school principal
is in the best position to observe and influence teachers and is the best source of instructional
supervision (Lockheed and Verspoor, 1991).

More recent approaches to instructional supervision focus on on-going professional

development to assist teacher in developing new skills to improve learning. In-service
education and continuous professional development are now considered a major and high
priority function for instructional supervision and the best and most powerful way to improve
learning. Today supervision is generally seen as leadership that encourages the continuous
involvement of all school personnel in the cooperative attempt to achieve the most effective
school program. It is a service for teachers that should result in improved instruction,
learning and curriculum through a positive, dynamic and democratic interaction, involving
all concerned, i.e. the child, the teacher, the supervisor, the administration and parents.

In Ethiopia as elsewhere, there has been shifted from one to the other in the choice of the
word supervision and inspection. When the concept was introduced in to the educational
system in the early forties, the name inspection was used. Later on, in the early sixties , the
inspection was replaced by supervision ,and again back to the former name inspection by the
start of eighties./ Addis Ababa city supervision manual /.

2.17.1. Past Experience

Educational education was introduced to the educational system in Ethiopia about 35 years
after the introduction of modern type of education in to the country. Ato Hiwot Hidaru
(1969) cited in Bogalle one of the pioneer inspectors indicated that primary school inspection
began in Tikimt19, 1934E.C. But there is no agreement when educational inspection started
in Ethiopia. For instance according to Haileselasse (2002) the school inspection was
introduced the first time in 1914 E.C. According to Gudeta Mamo (1969), among the forces
that brought about the need for school inspection was firstly, the fast growth of elementary
and secondary schools in the empire, secondary, the need for coordination of the curriculum
and thirdly, and most importantly, to help teachers in the class room activities. As stated by

36
Gebremedhin,(1994) the need for the coordination of the curriculum became necessary and
timely, because “there was not national curriculum with specified national goals”.

The schools were ill equipped and understaffed, with diversified and scattered program. The
supervisory leadership which was recognize as inspection was commenced by a British
educational expert and two other Ethiopians. The major responsibilities of the inspectors
were to collect and compile statistical data on number of student and teachers, number of
class-rooms available and class size, conduct school visits in the capital and in the provinces
and finally produce reports to submit to the ministry of Education as well as to the Emperor.

As more and more schools were open, the number of teachers increased and student
population grew significantly, and generally the educational activities became more and
complex, inspectorial tasks became beyond the competence of the three inspectors.
Therefore, it becomes necessary to produce competent inspectors through training. A series
of training program was organized and conducted in Kokebe Tsibah with cores of duration of
one year. The training programmed was given for six months (1943-1946 E.C).The training
program focused on aspects of teacher performance assessment; handling files /records/and
reporting; sanitation of school compound; how to apply psychology, and practice teaching.
The training program discontinued in 1946.

Because the training program had been discounted on the one hand, and the fact that although
few as they were, some of the already trained inspectors had either left the ministry of
education for better paying jobs elsewhere. To address the serious shortage of inspectors,
therefore, the training programmed re-started in 1948 E.C. The training program continued
for seven consecutive years, that is, 1948-1954 E.C. A six month inspector's course was
imitated at the Addis Ababa teacher training institute, which continued for two years, was
then dropped, and retained in 1956 as a Director-Inspector course. The course was
discontinue after 1960, when the concept of inspection was reject as too negative to meet the
need of a modern school system.

In 1961 the inspection Department was recognized as the section of supervision, with
responsibilities defined as the provision of professional guidance rather than making critical
evaluation, with emphasis on counseling school staff rather than reporting short comings.
After in 1965 E.C an attempt was made by the Ministry of Education to produce as many

37
supervisors, as possible by carrying out a six weeks training. However; was for less to meet
the supply of the required number, as the demand of scholars was exceedingly increasing.
With the change of the political system in the country that is socialist system, once a more a
shift from supervision to inspection was in 1973 E.C.

According to Zewudie Gebre Eggziabeer, who was the head of newly introduced inspectorate
office; inspection was defined as “ an instrument with which the political and Administrative
authorities maintain a necessary conduct with school, Administrative authorities maintain a
necessary conduct with school, teachers, pupils and the community to ensure that the system
is working satisfactorily and efficiently ”. In this sense, the office of the inspectorate was
expected to fulfill a controlling role as the guardian of educational standards and to serve as
the eyes and ears of the Minister. Finally, following the change of the political system in the
country, we again witness shift to supervision made as of 1986 E.C.

As stated in the new educational and training policy of 1994, Educational administration is
decentralized. In this respect, what is now investigated democratic supervision which would
seek the participation of all concerned in all spheres of the educational establishment in terms
of decision-making, planning, and development of objective and teaching strategies in an
effort to improve teaching learning process.

2.17.2. Present Trends

The New Education and Training Policy of April (1994), aggressively addresses the
relevance, quality, accessibility and equity issues which have been outstanding problems of
educational system to date.

According to the education sector strategy of September (1994) “will require changing the
highly centralized system of organization and management in to a decentralized, democratic
and participatory system.” Therefore , this suggests that , much of what was centrally
under taken by the ministry of education will devolve to the intermediate and lower level
of educational administrative that is to the Regional education Bureaus ,Zone and Woreda
education offices respectively; and schools will in this respect become centers of mission for
relevance, quality; accessibility and equity issues in education.

38
As an important phase of educational management and administration instructional
supervision must, therefore , susceptible to these changes .Thus ,what is now require is
democratic super vision MoE,(1989). According to Tekalign Tamru, (2011) stated that the
Current Practice of Educational Supervision in Ethiopia follows, a comprehensive and
coordinated approach need to be established between all those educational sectors (i.e.
educational institution and offices from central to woreda and school level).To efficiently and
effectively achieve the intended objectives of educational supervision in Ethiopia, there are
two approaches of organization of supervision: out of school organization of supervision and
school based organization of supervision.

Out of school organization, supervision is combined with department of educational

programs and supervision as federal MOE level, Regional Education Bureau level, Woreda
education office level and Cluster Resource Center level. Outside the school, the main
functions of educational supervision focus on: Rendering the necessary professional and
technical support to maintain quality and standard and maintaining the quality and standard
of education at all levels in order to ensure achievement of educational objectives. In line
with this, the supervision manual of MoE, (1987) revealed that out of school supervision is
expected to fours on the following major tasks: Organizing and implementing clinical
supervision in order to solve teachers’ instructional problems by setting discussion and
counseling sessions and providing instructional leadership for teachers, Ensuring that the
programs of education in schools addressed the local situation and the need of the
community, Demonstrating model supervisor activities for principals and department heads
and also preparing short term and frequent training and Evaluating and controlling the
implementation of curriculum and standards of the whole education system.

Organizing and implementing teachers’ in service trainings and experience sharing sessions.
Similarly, the major tasks of supervision department at regional level are enumerated as
follows: Developing the capacity of regional supervisors and providing technical support,
Ensuring implementation of federal are regional policies related to education program,
Monitoring and evaluating all education programs of the region/city administration,
Facilitating curriculum implementation and, Arranging forum for experience sharing among
teachers and Supervisors

39
Establishing and strengthen the linkage among bureau of education, sub- city education
office and schools in improving the quality of teaching practice. At sub city level, one
coordinator assigned to facilitate supervisory practice of schools and sub city education
office. The sub city education office is the closes administrative organ to schools where the
practical teaching actual tasks at sub city level include: Check, follow up, monitor and
evaluate school teaching learning activities in order to maintain expected quality and
standard, Ensure that educational programs inclined to local condition and community needs,
Organize and demonstrate appropriate teaching methods to teachers, Organize in-service
training programs through seminars, workshops, conference etc., to schools based
supervisors and teachers, Conduct periodic planned visits to schools to render support at the
spot and, Prepare reports to sub city education office on issues and problems for school
which are beyond capacity of the schools.

Externals supervisors have a role to play in supervision. However, due to time constraints,
this may not be possible on a regular basis. Realistically, external experts may only observe
lessons and appraise teachers practice once a year, and not every teachers in every school.
Therefore, the ministry of education suggested school based supervision system to achieve
the intended objectives of educational supervision collaborative level.

2.18. Problems in the Practice of Supervision in Ethiopia

When summarizing the main problems which supervision in Ethiopia encounter, seven points
are discussed, (Ministry of Education).These are:

Excessive workload is a constraint encountered by supervisors every here in the country.

Supervision is responsible for the many schools and as a result, schools are not properly
visited. Due to the large number of teachers, it is unthinkable to supervise by officers.
Supervision have also too many different tasks, some of which have little relationship with
supervision as such. The more administrative tasks, which are less call but generally more
urgent, are given more time than the real pedagogical .issues Even the school level
supervisors /principals/ department heads, and senior teachers / spend little time in class
room observation because they are highly loaded with their do their attitude more evaluative
than supportive.

40
Supervisors’ attitudes and procedures: Supervisors feel that their work is more disciplinary
than developmental because they are requested to perform, the task of both teacher support
control and supervision is felt to insufficiently flexible to meet the varied need of school and
teachers’. Because of this, a school visit becomes a perfunctory exercise that is of little use to
many teachers.

Lack of Training: However negative attitudes in adequate supervision procedures and poor
planning are not simply the result of an unreasonable heavy work load, what also contribute
in sufficient, if not non extent, provision of training for supervision and support staff,
induction as well as the in service training of supervisors lacks structure, continuity and a
focus on supervision and support issues.

Insufficient recruitment: Such scarcity of training is particularly deplorable in view of the

inefficient, recruitment procedures. The professional quality of the service has deteriorated to
some extent due to irregular promotions. The requirement of teachers with little teaching
experience is another problem to a lesser degree.

Poor Material, working conditions and support: Lack of materials and financial resources are
among the chronic problems in our education system. When insufficient funds are available
for traveling or no vehicles exist, the impact on the coverage and the quality of supervision is
detrimental.

Lack of follow up: it is one of the serious problems in the practice of supervision. Schools
heads and teachers seldom implement the advice of supervision and support staff. The
irregularity of school visits and the superficial nature of many supervision reports further
limit efficient follow up and,

Insufficient Budget: The absence of specific budget for supervision and support is another
critical problem that negatively affects the quality of supervision. Although school based
supervision and support receives a growing emphasis, the lack of funds for schools to
undertake their own supervision is a serious problem. In addition to the above mentioned
problems, poor status of supervision career, insufficient planning, lack of specific teacher
support service (such as resources centers),that responsibilities, lacks of self-supervision
allowance; etc. are also causes for insufficient practice of supervision in country
(MoE,1994).
41
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter deals with education of the methods that were applied in carrying out the study.
It will outline in detail the research design, sources of data, instruments and procedures of
data collection, sample and sampling technique, piloting of the research instruments and
methods of data analysis as well as ethical considerations.

3.1. Research Design

The purpose of this research was to assess the practices and problems of instructional
supervision in government secondary schools of Yeka Sub City in Addis Ababa City
Administration. In realizing this, a descriptive survey method was employed. This is because
the design could be investigated adequately the practices and problems of instructional
supervision. As stated by Kombo and Tromp (2006) a descriptive survey method would be
used when collecting information about teachers and principals’ attitude, opinions, habits and
any of the variety of educational supervision. Creswell (2008), a descriptive survey method
helps in picturing the existing situation. Additionally, it allows gathering of necessary
information using data collecting instruments and document analysis.

3.2. Sources of Data

In order to get the necessary information the researcher used both primary and secondary
sources. The primary sources of data were secondary school supervisors, principals, teachers,
and Sub City education office officers’ (teachers and school leaders’ development team
officers). The selection of these people as a source of data was based on the expectation that
they have better information and experiences with respect to the study topic. In addition, the
secondary sources of data including school supervision-related documents check lists of
supervision, guidelines available in sub- city education offices and schools, and the wider
related literature.

42
3.3. Sample and Sampling Techniques

3.3.1. Sample of the Study

In Yeka Sub City administration there are a total of nine government secondary schools in
2017/18. Out of these, five secondary schools were used as a sample of the study.

3.3.2. Sampling Techniques

In this study, 5(55.6%) secondary schools were selected by using simple random sampling
techniques. The reason to select 5(55.6%) government secondary schools were that the first
one was from a total of 9(100%) government secondary schools taking 5(55.6%) schools as a
sample was important to get pertinent information for the study, the second reason was
taking as a sample, almost 50% and above of schools from the total population were
necessary to assure the information that getting from the respondents represents all teachers
and principals that belongs to Yeka sub city, third, according to the researcher’s observation
and experience the problems of the study similar in the context of the whole Yeka sub city’s
government secondary schools, and fourth, all secondary schools supervised by the same
supervisors who were employed in Yeka sub city education office and they follow the same
principle and procedure.

In Yeka Sub-City education office, there are 3 supervisors and the researcher selected
3(100%) supervisors and 2(100%) teachers and school leaders development team officers by
using purposive sampling technique and 20 (100%) school principals (four from each school)
were selected using purposive sampling since they were directly or indirectly involved in
monitoring and implementing of the whole instructional process of secondary education.

The selected government secondary schools of Yeka Sub City were: higher-12, Tesfa
Birihan, Karalo, Millennium and Edget Chora Secondary school. By using simple random
sampling the researcher selected 20 teachers from each school on the basis of the 10 main
departments {(2 teachers from each department) (Amharic, English, Mathematics, Biology,
Chemistry, Physics, History, Geography, Civic and Ethical Education and ICT
Departments)} Hence, the total number of teachers taken as respondents was 100 (25.83%).
The following table could summarize the sample size and sampling techniques.

43
Table.1: Distribution of Respondents in the Sampled Sub-cities in 2017/18
Academic Year
Item Population Sample % Sampling Technique
Size
School 9 5 55.6 Simple random sampling
Supervisors 3 3 100 Purposive sampling
Officers 2 2 100 Purposive sampling
Principals 20 20 100 Purposive sampling
Teachers 387 100 25.83 Simple random sampling
Total 412 125 30.3

Source: from education statistics annual abstract (2017/2018) of Yeka sub city education
office.

3.4. Instruments and Procedures of Data Collection

3.4.1 Instruments of Data Collection

The researcher used both quantitative and qualitative instruments of data collection
(questionnaire, interview, and document analysis) for the study. Therefore, employing
multiple data collection instruments helped the researcher to combine, strengthen and amend
some of the inadequacies of the data and for triangulating it, (Cresswell, 2003).

Questionnaire: The first data collecting instrument employed in the study was
questionnaire. It was prepared in English for 20 principals and 100 teachers, using literature
on the area. Questionnaire was decided to be used in collecting the data because the number
of respondents in these two groups was relatively larger size of the population in the study.
The questionnaires were administered, both in closed ended and open ended. Open ended
questions are included in the questionnaire because it gives respondents a freedom to give
their extended views on the issue. Close ended questions used for their easiness in tabulation,
objectivity and suitability to keep respondents ideas on the subjects of the questionnaire.

The questionnaire had six parts. The first part was about demographic characteristics of
teachers and principals. The second part was about the supervisory practice regarding to
expected standards. The third part was about the practices of class room supervision. The

44
fourth part was clinical supervision. The fifth part was about perception on supervisory
services. The last or sixth part was about challenges of educational supervision.

Interviews: Interviews were employed for 3 (100%) of the sub-city supervisors and
2(100%) of sub city education office officers to collect information and suggestions. The
reason why structured interview was employed that the procedure used was standardized and
determined in advance as well as to obtain answers to carefully phrased questions (Koul,
2008). In order to obtain deeper information related to the problems and practices of
supervisors in the activities of instructional supervision in the study area in line of this a
Semi- structured interviews was conducted with supervisors. Five prepared guide interview
questions hold for 2 experts that selected through purposive sampling technique and also four
prepared guide interview questions hold for 3 supervisors that were also selected through
purposive sampling technique to reflect their ideas freely at their work place regarding their
current capacities of supervision in terms of their day to day activities. Interview was used as
a tool for gathering data required by the researcher to test hypothesis or solve the problem of
historical, experimental, survey or clinical type (Koul, 1996:176).

Document Analysis: Document analysis was made to check the practices and challenges
of supervision in promoting instruction in the target areas. Data for document analysis
obtained from AAEB, Yeka Sub-city Education Office and the two sample schools
documents like national and regional policy documents, annual abstracts, reports, minutes,
and Business Process Reengineering documents (BPR).

3.4.2. Procedures of Data Collection

First, the researcher visited to the sub city education office and discusses the purpose of the
research and asked the sub city education office to write a letter to secondary schools. Then
the researcher also visited the school principals and discussed the purpose of the research
with them showing the letters from the sub city education Office which later their copies
distributed to each respondent. Then, the researcher clarified the objective of the research,
and asking whether the respondents are willing to the interview or not. After that the
researcher used semi structured interview so as to let the interviewee to express her/his
feeling freely. The researcher used the ideas collected from other source (in contrast to the
well-structured one) and at the same time more convenient for analysis purpose than
45
unstructured interview (Wragg, 2002). The researcher also distributed the questionnaires to
the respondent teachers and principals after he selected them and give enough time to fill the
questionnaires.

3.5. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments

Before the final questionnaires were administered, pilot testing was conducted in Beshale
secondary school, which is found in Bole sub city. It helped to ensure that the respondents
understood what the questionnaire want to address and would be done with the objectives of
checking whether or not the items contained in the instruments enabled the researcher to
gather relevant information, to identify and eliminate problems in collecting data from the
target population. The draft questionnaire was distributed to a school principal, a vice
principal, 2 department’s heads natural and social science, 26 teachers and 3 sub city
supervisors were selected purposively.

After the questionnaires filled and returned to the researcher and analyzed the reliability and
validity of items measured by using Crobanch’s alpha method were the help of SPSS version
20 and obtained test result was 0.85. Then, as the result indicated it was a good indication of
the internal consistency of items. That was the instrument was found to be reliable as
statistical literature recommend a test result of 0.9 (90% reliability) and above as reliable.

3.6. Methods of Data Analysis

In order to conduct the analysis of data, descriptive statistical analysis was used. The data
collected through structured questionnaire are presented in tables and analyzed using
frequencies and measures of central tendencies (mainly mean and weighted means). In
addition, the qualitative data gathered through interviews and document reviews were
systematically coded, thematically organized, analyzed and interpreted using case by case
and cross case analysis. The results that are obtained from the interviews and document
review are used for the purpose of strengthening the analysis made based on the
questionnaires.

Finally, the data were analyzed and discussed to reach at certain findings. With specific
reference to the analysis of the data gathered through the questionnaire having a five scale
extending from extremely low (1) to extremely high (5) for rating and extremely disagree (1)

46
to extremely agree (5) for Likert scale, the results gained in the form of mean values were
interpreted as follows. All the mean values found below 1.50 were taken as extremely low or
extremely poor. Mean values that ranged from 1.51-2.50 were treated as low /poor/ weak.
Mean values that extended from 2.51-3.50 were interpreted as medium /fair/ moderate/
average/ reasonable. Mean values found in the range of 3.51-4.50 were judged as high
/strong/ while the mean values above 4.50 were interpreted as very high /very strong/. In
general, the mean values below 2.50 were considered as threat while mean values above 3.50
were taken as opportunity. In between, mean values that range from 2.50-3.50 were
considered as medium /average/ moderate.

3.7. Ethical Consideration

To make the research process professional, ethical consideration was made. The researcher
guided the participant about the aim of the study. The aim of the study was also clear in the
introduction part of the questionnaire and interview guide to the respondents: and confirm
that subject’s confidentiality was saving. In addition to this, they were oriented that their
participation in the study was based on their consent. The research had not personalized any
of the respondent’s response during data presentations analysis and interpretation.
Furthermore, all the materials used for this research had been acknowledged.

47
 CHAPTR FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data. It has two major
parts. The first part presents the characteristics of the respondents’ distribution in terms of
sex, educational qualifications and experiences. The second part deals with the presentation,
analysis and interpretation of data. It covers the degree of practice of instructional
supervision, the conditions under which the supervision has been implemented and the level
of its perception by teachers and principals, the challenges encountered while the supervision
has been implemented.

4.1. General Characteristics of the Respondents

In the study, 100 teachers, 20 school principals, 3 supervisors and 2 sub city education office
TDP process owner officers were included to respond to the questions set in the
questionnaires and interviews. Out of 100 copies of questionnaires distributed to teachers 96
(96%) and out of 20 copies distributed to principals 20(100%) were returned. Based on the
answers obtained from the respondents, the analysis and interpretation of the data were
presented in table 2.

Table.2: Characteristics of Respondents by Sex, Educational Qualification and Yeas of

service
Items Respondents
Officers Supervisors Principals Teachers
N % N % N % N %
Male 1 50 3 100 18 90 73 76.04
Sex Female 1 50 2 10 23 23.95
Total 2 100 3 100 20 100 96 100
Educational Degree 2 100 1 33.33 18 90 81 84.37
qualification Second degree 2 66.67 2 10 15 15.62
and above
Total 2 100 3 100 20 100 96 100
1 – 5 years 8 8.33
6 – 10 years 1 1 39 40.62
Years of 11 – 15 years 6 30 23 23.95
Service 16 – 20 years 2 100 10 50 13 13.54
21 and above 3 100 3 15 13 13.54
Total 2 100 3 100 20 100 96 100

48
As it is depicted in the Table 2 above, male and female officers respondents were equal in
number (50%) each, all supervisor respondents were male and constituted 3(100%), male
principal respondents constituted 18(90%) while female counter parts numbered 2(10%).
However, when it comes to teachers 73(76.05%) were male and 23(23.9%) were females.

The second item in the Table 2 indicates educational qualification of the respondents. All sub
city education office expert respondents were about 2(100%) and had first degree. Majority
of supervisor respondents that was about 2(66.7%) had second degree and 1(33.3%) was first
degree holder. However, 18(90%) of the principals were degree holders and 2(10%)
principals were second degree holders. On the other hand, the educational qualification of
teachers 81(84.4%) of teachers were first-degree holders whereas, 15(15.6%) were second-
degree holders. But the MOE guidelines indicate that school supervisors, principals and
teachers need to have a minimum of second degree to manage government secondary
schools. From this one can conclude that the school strongly need in-service training program
for principals and teachers to upgrade their academic status.

When we look at service years of officers’ respondents, all 2 (100%) had a service year of
between 16 and 20 years. However, the service years of supervisor respondents, all 3 (100%)
had a service year of 21 and above. On the other hand, 1(5%) of principal respondent had a
service year of 6 to 10 years, 10(50%) principals respondents had a service of 16-20 years
and the remaining 3(15%) had service year of 21 and above. Similarly, 8(8.3%) of the
teachers of the sample schools had an experience from 1–5 years. On the other hand,
39(40.62%) of them had a service years ranging from 6–10 years and 23(23.95%) of them
had a service years ranging from 11 –15 years while the remaining 13(13.54%) of teachers
respondents each has a service years ranging from 16-20 years and 21 and above years
respectively. This indicates that supervisors and school principals in the study areas had
relatively longer years of instructional supervision, which is instrumental in improving
instructional supervision as well as the teaching learning process.

Essentially, these respondents were taken from five secondary schools of Yeka Sub City
(higher-12, Birihan guzo, Tesfa Birihan, Karalo, Millennium and Edget Chora Secondary
school) and the Education Office of Yeka Sub City.

49
4.2. Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This section elucidates the analysis and interpretation of data on the thematic components
focusing on the domains of supervision, implementation, perception, the challenges
encountered and the conditions (class room) under which the instructional supervision had
been implemented.

4.2.1. Practice of Educational Supervision in Promoting Domains of Supervision

Theoretically, educational supervision has a great role in promoting instruction, curriculum

and staff development activities. To this end, some supervisory activities were listed in the
questionnaire and the school principals and teachers were asked to indicate the level to which
the supervisory practices enabled teachers to get benefit of instructional supervision as
expected in each three domain. It was in view of this, 17 major items were administered to
the respondents for rating. These items were also categorized in to three major domains of
school supervision: instructional development, curriculum development and staff
development.

Tables 3-5 below present the results of the findings based on the ratings made by all
respondents.

50
4.2.1.1. Practices for Instructional Development

Table.3: Respondents rating on the Level of Supervisory Practices for Instructional

Development
The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group X Deviation value Value
help teachers in formulating Principal 4.00 .46
1 appropriate instructional objectives to 1.65 .10
Teacher 3.67 .88
develop lesson plan.
help teachers to set up simple Principal 2.35 .87
2 experimental class room and -.64 .52
Teacher 2.51 1.04
evaluation for improvement.
help teachers develop skills of Principal 1.65 .81
3 applying different assessment and
-1.49 .14
measurement techniques through Teacher 1.94 .78
organizing in-service training.
assist teachers in identifying locally Principal 3.45 1.19
4
available teaching and learning -.39 .70
Teacher 3.56 1.18
resources.
provide immediate feedback to Principal 2.55 .94
teachers particularly after lesson .36 .71
5 Teacher 2.47 .89
observation.
help teachers in identifying Principal 2.95 .60
3.43 .00
6 instructional problems. Teacher 2.17 .98
help to organize meetings for teachers Principal 3.40 .94
to solve common instructional 3.14 .002
7 Teacher 2.59 1.06
problems.
Principal 2.91
Average Mean /W.M/
Teacher 2.70
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high.

As can be seen in Table 3, principals rated Item 1 as ‘high’ with the mean score of, M= 4.00;
SD= .46. This item includes the extent to which instructional supervisors help teachers in
formulating appropriate instructional objectives to develop lesson plan. Similarly, teachers
did also rate the given activity practiced by instructional supervisors as ‘high’ with the mean
score of M= 3.67; SD=.88. The independent t-test result, t (2, 116) =1.65, p=0.10, indicating
51
statistically significance difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.
This may be resulted from the views of principals and teachers implies supervisors play an
important role in assisting teachers to prepare well organized lesson plan in the sampled
schools.

The second item in the same table consists of issue that is the extent to which instructional
supervisors help teachers to set up simple experimental class room and evaluation for
improvement. Concerning this point, principals’ respondents rated as ‘low’ with the mean
score of M= 2.35; SD=.87. While teachers respondents stated that practice of supervisor in
developing instructional program were moderate (M= 2.51; SD= 1.03) to help teachers to set
up simple experimental class room and evaluation for improvement. Moreover, the
independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = -.64; p=0.52, depicts that statistically significance was
not observed between the response of the two groups. The response gap may be resulted from
developing instructional program by supervisors did not help teachers to set up simple
experimental class room and evaluation for improvement and this implies that the two groups
(principals and teachers) were not in a position of performing the experimental activity in
science laboratory of the sample school. Therefore, teachers felt that the topics presented in
the process of teaching learning were not supervised by the instructional supervisors.

Concerning item 3 in the same Table, principals and teachers respondents notified that the
practice of supervisor in developing instructional program were low to help teachers develop
skills of applying different assessment and measurement techniques through organizing in-
service training. This shows that practices of supervisors were not as much as in developing
instructional program. The result of independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = -1.49; p=0.14,
depicts that statistically significance was not observed between the response of the two
groups. Therefore, from this analysis one can infer that the two groups of respondents were
not fully helped by the supervisory practices as expected. This implies the need for effective
training for teachers which can transform the principals and teachers even the context of
complicated challenges of applying different assessment and measurement techniques.

Regarding item 4 in the same Table, principals replied that the practice of supervisor in
developing instructional program were moderate to assist teachers in identifying locally
available teaching and learning resources with mean values, M= 3.45; SD= 1.19. On the

52
other hand, teachers stated that practice of supervisor in developing instructional program
highly assisted teachers in identifying locally available teaching and learning resources.
Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = - 39; p=0.70, depicts that statistically
significance was not observed between the response of the two groups. This indicates that
teachers involved in practicing using the method learning by doing. Therefore, the analysis
reveals that the extent to which instructional supervisors helped teachers in the selection of
appropriate resource like teaching aids was found to be high as observed from the total. This
implies that teachers are getting the benefits of instructional supervision as sufficiently and
expected.

Instructional supervisors provide immediate feedback to teachers particularly after lesson

observation was the issue on table 3 item 5 and the mean value of principals were M= 2.55;
SD=0.94 whereas the teachers mean value were M=2.47; SD=0.89. As the figure indicates
the mean score of principals about instructional supervisors provide immediate feedback to
teachers particularly after lesson observation were moderate whereas teachers replied in this
regard were low. However, the independent t- test result t (2, 116) = .36, p=0.71 the statically
significance difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. The
analysis reveals that the extents to which instructional supervisors provide immediate
feedback to teachers particularly after lesson observation was found to be low as observed
from the mean score of both respondents. Therefore, from the above analysis one can
conclude that there was a limitation in providing immediate feedback to teachers particularly
after lesson observation. Thus, teachers may not have an equal opportunity to learn from
feedback as expected.

The sixth question in the same table is about the practice of supervisors in instructional
development help teachers in identifying instructional problems. Concerning this point,
principals replied that developing instruction were average to help teachers in identifying
instructional problems with the mean score of M= 2.95; SD=0.60. On the other hand,
teachers reported that instructional development was low to help teachers in identifying
instructional problems with the mean score of M=2.17; SD=0.98 correspondingly. Moreover,
the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 3.43; p=0.00, depicts that statistically significance
difference was observed between the response of the two groups. This implies that teachers

53
are not getting support from instructional supervisors to acquire the benefits of instructional
supervision as sufficiently and expected.

Finally, table 3 item 7 presents question about instructional supervisors help to organize
meetings for teachers to solve common instructional problems. Principals replied that the
practice of instructional supervisor were moderate with the mean scores M= 3.40; SD=0.94.
Similarly, teacher respondents also rated moderate with the mean scores M=2.59; SD=1.06
and t-test result, t (2, 116) = 3.14; P=0.00, indicating a significant difference was observed
between the respondents of the two groups. The analysis reveals that the extent to which
instructional supervisors help to organize meetings for teachers to solve common
instructional problems was found to be moderate as observed from the mean score of both
respondents. From the above analysis, one can conclude that there was a limitation in helping
to organize meetings for teachers to solve common instructional problems. Thus, teachers
may not have an equal opportunity to learn how to solve common instructional problems
from others as expected.

In examining this and other related issues, document reviews and interviews were conducted
to explore what has been happening in reality. Additional information was also collected on
clarity of the current performance of supervisors pertaining to the instructional development
activities and follow up mechanisms. Accordingly, the results gained from the research
participants were consulted through interviews had shown similar views with the information
gathered through questionnaires. Discussants openly portrayed teachers did not gain the
expected support to improve their instructional support (to set up experimental class room,
develop different assessment techniques, identifying and solving common instructional
problem) from the supervisors. For instance, one of the experts of the sub city education
office said “I think we all fail to initiate or fail to emphasize the essence of the improvement
of instructional development by the practice of supervision including myself”.

To this end, the practice of supervision made instructional development; the level of
supervisors to help teachers develop skills of applying different assessment and measurement
techniques through organizing in-service training seems fragmentary in nature. In addition to
this, only two items (help teachers in formulating appropriate instructional objectives to
develop lesson plan and assist teachers in identifying locally available teaching and learning

54
resources) were rated “high” by both respondents. Hence, the entire ratings fail with the
range of “medium” or “low”. This was also supported by the information gathered through
interviews. The degrees of supervisors help teachers and principals made for supervision
were not adequate to transform instructional development. This implies that the
implementation of supervision has been compromised by the absence of sound practices of
instructional development. Hence, the practice and implementation of the supervision seems
questionable in this regard.

4.2.1.2. Practices in Curriculum Development

Table.4: Respondents rating on the Level of Supervisory Practices for Curriculum

Development
The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T-value P-
supervisors; Group Deviation Value
assisting teachers in the Principal 4.20 .61
1 implementation of the new .99 .32
Teacher 4.02 .75
curriculum
help to evaluate the existing Principal 2.10 1.02
2
curriculum and text book so as
to take immediate corrective -.76 .44
Teacher 2.29 1.02
measure and provide feedback
to the curriculum specialists.
help to identifying the problems Principal 2.15 .81
3
in implementing the existing
-.50 .61
curriculum as per the education Teacher 2.26 .89
policy to improve curriculum
collect and provide necessary Principal 2.70 .73
educational material that is
4 -.33 .73
suppurating to the existing Teacher 2.77 .88
curriculum.
help to integrate the existing Principal 3.25 .96
5
curriculum with the co- 1.04 .30
Teacher 2.98 1.076
curricular activities.
Principal 2.88
Total Mean
Teacher 2.86

55
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high

As can be seen from Table 4 with average mean value of 2.88 and 2.86 by principals and
teachers respectively, both groups have perceived that the level of supervisory support in
curriculum development activities had been found medium. This shows that both groups of
respondents have not effectively implemented the practice in the sample school.

In Table 4, the school principals and teachers were asked the degree support teachers get in
the implementation of new curriculum from the supervisor. Accordingly, the teachers and
principals respondents responded that the support they get from supervisors in the
implementation of the new curriculum was high with the respective mean score of M=4.20,
SD= .61 and M=4.02, SD= .75 and t-test result, t (2, 116) = .99; P=0.32, indicating that
significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. The
analysis shows that the extents to which instructional supervisors assists teachers in the
implementation of the new curriculum was found to be high as observed from the result of
mean sores. From this statistical evidence, in the study area there is no doubt that teachers
were benefited from the practice of supervisors in a sufficient way as perceived by teachers
and principals as highly expected.

As indicated in the same Table item 2, two groups of respondents were asked about the
degree to which instructional supervisors help teachers to evaluate the existing curriculum, so
as to take immediate corrective measures and provide feedback to the curriculum specialists,
with the mean score of M= 2.10, SD= 1.02; and M= 2.29, SD= 1.02; both the principals and
teacher respondents rated this item as low and t-test result, t (2, 116) = -.76; P=0.44,
indicating significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. This analysis shows that the extents to which instructional supervisors help to
evaluate the existing curriculum so as to take immediate corrective measure and provide
feedback to the curriculum specialists was found to be low as observed from the statistical
data. As opposed to this, effective implementation of school supervision require adequate
support of teachers to evaluate the existing curriculum and without these learners are likely to
confront grave difficulties in their academic achievement.

56
The third item in Table 4 above regards with the degree to which instructional supervisors
help to identifying the problems in implementing the existing curriculum as per the education
policy to improve curriculum. In this regard, the principal and the teacher respondents rated it
as low with the respective mean score of M= 2.15, SD=.81; and M= 2.26, SD= .89 and t-test
result, t (2, 116) = -.51; P=0.61, indicating a significant difference was not observed between
the respondents of the two groups. Therefore, the extent of the practices seems low as
responded by two groups of respondents. This implies that teachers highly need support from
instructional supervisors to identify the problems in implementing the existing curriculum as
per the education policy to improve curriculum.

Concerning the degree to which instructional supervisors helps to collect and provide
necessary educational materials that are supportive to the existing curriculum; the principals
and teachers respondents were rated the practice as moderate with the respective mean score
of M= 2.70, SD=.73; and M= 2.77, SD= .88 and t-test result, t (2, 116) = -.33; P=0.74
indicating a significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. The analysis shows that the degree to which instructional supervisors helped to
collect and provide necessary educational materials that are supportive to the existing
curriculum was found to be average as observed from statistical data. This implies that
instructional supervisors perceive their own performance positive as opposed to the view of
school principals and teachers.

Finally, as indicated in Table 4 item 5 the degree to which instructional supervisors helps to
integrate the existing curriculum with the co-curricular activity, with the respective mean
score of M= 3.25, SD=.96; and M= 2.98, SD= 1.07 the principals and teachers respondents
rated the item as moderate. The independent t-test result, t (2, 116) =0.24, p=0.80, indicating
a statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups
The analysis shows that the extent to which instructional supervisors helped to integrate the
existing curriculum with the co-curricular activities was negligible in the sampled schools.

Serious concerns were also raised on the difficulty level of the curriculum used. The data
gathered through interviews from the experts of Yeka sub city education office expressed
serious concerns with regard to curriculum development practices in the school. The experts
fully admitted the insufficient practices of curriculum development activities supported by

57
supervisors in the school. For instance, one of the experts said, “in spite of having current
curriculum, we do not have clear plan for the support of supervisors in curriculum
development practices in our school. I believe that, this could be among the key areas in
which we should work more in the future”.

4.2.1.3. Practices in Staff Development

Table.5: Supervisory Endeavor in Staff Development activity

Item The level to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
give the latest information about Principal 3.10 1.021
1 the teaching learning strategies that .440 .661
Teacher 2.99 1.021
enhance teachers’ profession
2 assist teachers to conduct actionPrincipal 2.85 1.089
2.677 .009
research. Teacher 2.22 .93
Principal
3 help teachers to share best practices 2.95 1.27
2.49 .01
from different schools Teacher 2.31 .98
4 provide an induction program forPrincipal 3.05 1.09
1.98 .05
new teachers Teacher 2.55 1.00
Principal
5 provide short-term training at school 2.55 1.23
.24 .80
level Teacher 2.48 1.17
Principal 2.51
Average Mean Value/W.M/
Teacher 2.51
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high.

The two groups of respondents in the Table 5 above were also asked to indicate their views
on the extent to which the supervisory practice to promote staff development activity.
Accordingly in table 5 item 1, with the mean score of, M=3.10 and M=2.99; SD=1.02 the
principal and teachers respondents were revealed that instructional supervisors contribute to
enhance professional competence of teachers by providing the latest information on the
teaching theories and strategies in a moderate respectively. The independent t-test result, t (2,
116) =0.44, p=0.66, indicates that statistically significant difference was not observed
between the response of the two groups. The analysis shows that the degree to which
instructional supervisors helped to contribute to enhance professional competence of teachers

58
by providing the latest information on the teaching theories and strategies was found to be
average as observed from the response of respondents. This implies that the conditions in the
sampled schools are not favorable for the teachers to advance their level of competencies in
the desired way. Ultimately, this condition affects classroom instructions.

For the successful accomplishment of quality education supervisors assist teachers to conduct
action research is very important. In this regard, respondents were asked to indicate their
views on the degree to which supervisors’ assists teachers to conduct action research. To this
end, with the mean scores of M= 2.85; SD= 1.09, the principals respondents were rated as
medium. On the contrary, the response of teachers was rated as low with the mean scores of
M= 2.22; SD= .93. The independent t-test result, t (2, 277) =0.72, p=0.47, indicating
statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.
The analysis reveals that the extent to which instructional supervisors assists teachers to
conduct action research was found to be medium and low as observed from the responses of
respondents in the sampled schools. Therefore, one observed that the absence of action
research that has been done by teachers at the school level is a serious challenge as it hinders
understanding the entire problems of teaching learning in general and what is happening in
the classroom in particular.

The third item in Table 6, is the degree to which instructional supervisors helps teachers to
share best practices from different schools, Principals notified that the practice of supervisors
to staff development was moderate to assist teachers to share best practices from different
schools with the mean score of, M=2.95; SD=1.27 whereas teachers pin pointed out that the
activities of supervisors to share best practices from different schools was rated as low with
the mean score of M= 2.31; SD= 0.98. The independent t-test result, t (2, 116) =2.49, p=0.01,
indicating statistically significant difference was observed between the response of the two
groups. The analysis shows that the extent to which instructional supervisors helped to
teachers to share best practices from different schools was found to be moderate and low as
observed from the response of principals and teachers respectively. This implies that the
supervisory practices were found in a way to benefit teachers though not as expected. Hence,
instructional supervisors are expected to contribute to improved performances of teachers in
their school activity.

59
As can be seen in Table 5, item 4 respondents were asked about the degree to which
supervisors provide an induction programs for new teachers. In respect to this point,
principals replied that practice of supervisors were average to provide an induction programs
for new teachers. Similarly, teachers were also reported moderate that the activities of
supervisors in providing an induction program for new teachers with the mean score of M=
3.05; SD=1.09 and M=2.55; SD=1.00 correspondingly. Moreover, the independent t-test
result, t (2, 116) = 1.98; p=0.05, depicts that statistically significant difference wass observed
between the response of the two groups. The analysis shows that the extent to which
instructional supervisors provide an induction program for new teachers was found to be
medium as observed from the response of both respondents. It is a fact that provides an
induction programs for new teacher is very essential to help him/her to cope up with new
working environment. This reveals that the current role of instructional supervisors
pertaining to this activity was somewhat better. This may ultimately leads to teachers’
satisfaction with an induction program for new teachers.

As per item 5 of table 5, the degree to which instructional supervisors help to provide short
term training at school level, the principal and teachers respondents rated as medium with the
mean score of, M=2.55; SD=1.23 and M=2.48; SD=1.417 respectively. The independent t-
test result, t (2, 116) =0.24, p=0.80, indicating statistically significant difference was not
observed between the response of the two groups. The analysis shows that the extent to
which instructional supervisors helped to provide short term training at school level was
found to be moderate as observed from the total. From this analysis one can infer that, the
training given by supervisors at school level was very limited. Indeed, good practices of
teaching require capacitating teachers by providing adequate training on issues like the use of
active teaching - learning approach because, that is a total shift - changing the culture of
chalk and talk (moving from teacher centered to student centered).

In fact, the data gathered from the sub city supervisors through interviews supported the data
gathered through questionnaires. Among others, one of the secondary school supervisors who
were interviewed at the sub city level questioned the very potential of schools in providing
financial support by saying “usually the City and Sub City level political authorities do
allocate pupils based budget to support the staff development program.”

60
4.2.2. Supervisory Activities Expected During Clinical Supervision

Clinical supervision involves the concept of analysis, diagnosis and remediation. These all
processes help to improve the students learning by improving the teacher’s classroom
behavior or activities. To ensure the three phases of clinical supervision whether they really
practiced it or not, empirical evidence is very necessary. Tables 6, 7 and 8 describe the major
three phases of clinical supervision attained in terms of pre observation conference,
observational and post observation conference. A total of 9 items were administered to all
respondents. Under each phase three specific issues were raised. The results obtained are
presented as follows:

4.2.2.1. Pre-observation Conference Stage of Clinical Supervision

Table.6: Supervisory activity during Pre-observation Stage

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents’ Mean Std. T-value P-
supervisors: Group Deviation Value
conduct pre-observation Principal 2.50 1.19
1 -1.45 .14
conference Teacher 2.90 1.09
analyze the lesson plan of the Principal 2.65 1.26
2
supervisee teacher before class -1.42 .15
Teacher 3.06 1.15
room visit.
make agreement with teachers on Principal 3.35 .93
3
the objectives and methods of 1.40 .16
Teacher 2.97 1.13
presentation
Principal 2.83
Total Average Mean/W.M/
Teacher 2.98
W.M weighed mean, Significance level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than
or equal to 1.51 =Never, 1.51-2.5 =Rarely, 2.51-3.5=Sometimes, 3.51-4.5=Mostly and 4.51 -
5.00=Always

The first item in Table 6 was concerning the pre-conference. Hence, the first item aims at
knowing whether the supervisors inform the supervisee teacher before conducting the
classroom observation or not. Accordingly, with the mean value of principals M= 3.50;
SD=0.93 whereas the teachers mean value M=2.90; SD=1.09 as the figure indicates, the
mean score of principals about instructional supervisors conducting pre-observation
conference during clinical supervision were rated at sometimes where as teachers replied in

61
this regard were also sometimes. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = -1.45 p=0.14
indicating that statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents
of the two groups. The analysis reveals that the extent to which the supervisors inform the
supervisee teacher before conducting the classroom was found to be sometimes as observed
from the response of respondents. Such problems may create due to the supervisors
misunderstanding of their role, their experience and field of specialization also seem to show
that they do not have any knowledge as how to conduct pre observation and post observation
conferences.

Item 2 of the same Table also depicts the views of respondents on the extent to which
instructional supervisors’ analyses of lesson plans of supervisee teachers before classroom
visits. It is very essential during this stage if teachers explain the objectives of the lesson, the
method of presentations and techniques of evaluations. In this regard, with the mean value of
principals M= 3.50; SD=0.93 whereas the teachers mean value M=2.82; SD=0.93 as the
figure indicates, the mean score of principals and teachers about the extent of instructional
supervisors analyzing the lesson plan of the supervisee teacher before classroom visit were
rated at some times. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = -1.42, p=0.15 indicating that
statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. This analysis depicts that the supervisory endeavor to the stated activity was
exercised some times as observed from the response of the respondents.

The third item of table 6 was to check the extent to which instructional supervisors make
agreement with teachers on the objective and methods of presentation of the lesson to be
observed before the actual observation or not. Accordingly, with the mean scores of M=3.35;
SD=.93 and M=2.97; SD= 1.13 principals and teachers respondents were rated as sometimes
respectively. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = 1.40, p=0.16 indicating that
statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. The analysis shows that the extent to which instructional supervisors make
agreement with teachers on the objective and methods of presentation of the lesson to be
observed before the actual observation was found to be practiced sometimes as observed
from the responses of respondents. Therefore, from the view of principal and teacher

62
respondents, one could understand that there appears no application of pre observation
conference.

However, as stated clearly in the supervision manual of Ministry of Education (MoE, 1994)
every classroom observation should be implemented based on a clearly stated certain criteria
and should be known by the supervisee before the supervisors carry out classroom
observation. These criteria were formulated on the basis of the purpose for the observation
and in relation to the way of recording necessary classroom information and how to analyze
the recorded information easily.

4.2.2.2. Observational Stage

Table.7: Supervisory Practices During Observation Stage

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
take sufficient time for observing Principal 2.30 1.031
the teachers teaching behavior
1
during classroom observation .687 .493
Teacher 2.10 1.183
according to the Pre-conference
discussion
record important data on the Principal 2.90 1.373
2
teaching learning process and
.361 .719
how the teacher and students are Teacher 2.79 1.187
performing
usse the agreed upon procedures Principal 3.50 1.147
3
to collect the relevant data
.830 .408
pertaining the instructional Teacher 3.27 1.119
process.
Principal 2.90
Total Mean
Teacher 2.72
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =Never, 1.51-2.5 =Rarely, 2.51-3.5=Sometimes, 3.51-4.5=Mostly and 4.51 -
5.00=Always

Item 1 of Table 7 indicated that, the respondents were asked whether the instructional
supervisors take sufficient time for observing the teachers’ teaching behavior during
classroom observation according to the pre-conference discussion or not. Accordingly,

63
principals and teachers, with (M=2.30, SD=1.03), and (M= 2.10, SD= 1.18) mean scores
respectively replied that; instructional supervisors rarely taking sufficient time for observing
the teachers teaching behavior during classroom observation according to the Pre-conference
discussion. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = .68, p=0.49 indicating that a
statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. This implies that the instructional supervisors’ performance pertaining to this activity
was found to be not sufficient enough as revealed by the two groups of respondents.

The purpose of classroom observation is improving the quality of teaching learning activities
in the classroom. Hence, the supervisor should stay in the class from the beginning to the end
of that period. Because, if a supervisor observes some parts of the class activity and leaves
the class, the supervisee teacher may suspect the supervisor to judge his or her activity in a
negative way and the supervisee may feel unhappy. Moreover, since teaching learning
process is continuous and holds various activities; observing specific parts of the classroom
observation could not enable to know the detailed performance of the supervisee teacher
(MoE, 1994).

In the above Table item 2, respondents were asked whether or not supervisors recorded
essential data during the observation phase. In respect to this the principals and teachers
respondents with M=2.90, SD=1.37, and M= 2.79, SD= 1.18 mean scores respectively
revealed the practice as some times. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = .36, p=0.72
indicating that a statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents
of the two groups. The above analysis shows that, the current supervisory practices
pertaining to this activity was found to be sometimes practiced. It is however, too essential to
conduct recording important data on the teaching learning process and how the teacher and
students are performing unless the trusting relationship between teachers and instructional
supervisors may not be ensured.

It is also essential to build teachers confidences and trust. Thus, to ensure this instructional
supervisors are expected to use the agreed up on procedures to collect relevant data
pertaining to the instructional process during observation. In this regard, the principal and
teacher respondents rated as some times with M=3.50, SD=1.14, and M= 3.27, SD= 1.18
mean scores respectively. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = .83, p=0.40 indicating

64
that a statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. The analysis shows that the extent to which instructional supervisors use the agreed
upon procedures to collect the relevant data pertaining the instructional process was found to
be sometimes practiced as observed from the response of the two groups of respondents.
Both groups of respondents seem to agree that instructional supervisory were not sufficiently
performing this activity. Therefore, any supervisor should keep everything in accordance
with the agreement with teachers in order to increase the confidence and trust of teachers
with supervisory practices.

4.2.2.3. Post Observational Conference Stage

Table.8: Supervisory Practices during Post Observational Stage

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
conduct post-observation Principal 2.50 1.14
1 1.50 .135
conference Teacher 2.17 .84
2 analyze the recorded data in Principal 3.55 1.14
1.40 .163
terms of established objectives Teacher 3.14 1.21
3 discuss with the supervisee Principal 3.15 1.22
teacher on the data collected .41 .676
Teacher 3.03 1.13
during the classroom observation
Principal 3.07
Total Mean
Teacher 2.78
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =Never, 1.51-2.5 =Rarely, 2.51-3.5=Sometimes, 3.51-4.5=Mostly and 4.51 -
5.00=Always

When we move to conducting the post observations conference of the first item it was aim at
checking whether the instructional supervisors and the teachers’ hold a post observation
conference to examine the consistencies and discrepancies between the planned and actual
enactments of the lessons being observed. Accordingly, principals and teachers with M= 2.50,
SD= 1.14, and M= 2.17, SD= .84 mean scores respectively indicated that, the extent to which
instructional supervisors conducting post-observation conference after class room observation
were rated as rare. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = 1.50, p=0.13 indicating that the
statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of the two

65
groups. The above analysis indicates that the practice pertaining to this activity was found to
be rarely practiced as observed from the total. For provision of appropriate feedback it is too
necessary to make sense of raw data.

In the same Table item 2, principals with M= 3.55, SD= 1.14 mean scores indicated that,
instructional supervisors analyze the recorded data in terms of established objectives mostly.
While as teachers respondents with M = 3.14, SD= 1.21 mean score indicated that supervisors
sometimes analyze the recorded data in terms of established objectives. The independent t-
test result, t (2, 116) = 1.40, p=0.16 indicating that the statistically significant difference was
not observed between the respondents of the two groups. The analysis shows that the
practices of instructional supervisors with regard to the stated above activity were found to be
rarely practiced as observed from the teacher’s respondents but mostly practiced as observed
from the principal respondents. This may results to inappropriate interpretation of data and
finally it leads to inappropriate feedback provision to teachers.

As it is indicated on item 3, table 7, respondents were also asked the extent to which whether
or not supervisors discuss with the supervisee teacher on the collected data during the class
observation. To this end, the principal and teachers respondents were asserted to this activity
as sometimes with the mean scores, M= 3.15; SD=1.22 and M=3.03; SD= 1.13 respectively.
The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = .41, p=0.67 indicating that a statistically significant
difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. The analysis reveals
that the extent to which instructional supervisors have discussed with the supervisee teacher
on the collected data during the class observation was found to be practiced sometimes as
observed from the total. This implies that supervisors were providing haphazard feedback for
teachers during post conference which may create ambiguity on teachers to use the feedbasck
appropriately.

The extent to which instructional supervisors confirmed that the collected relevant data as per
the agreed upon issues, analyzed the recorded data in terms of established objectives were
rarely practiced and discussed with the supervisee teacher on the collected data during the
class observation were practiced sometimes.

The data gathered through interview session with the instructional supervisors also support
the above finding. As a result, all (3) supervisors, stated that they did not make mutual

66
agreements with each supervisee on the purpose for the classroom observation, or for a
suitable time; nor for the data which was to be collected during the observation. Rather they
entered the class taking the prepared observation format. Moreover the documents available
in the school showed that the schedule for classroom observations was prepared by them
without participation or individual supervisee involvement.

As stated clearly in the supervision manual of Ministry of Education (MoE, 1994) every
classroom observation should be implemented based on a clearly stated certain criteria and
should be known by the supervisee before the supervisors carry out classroom observation.
These criteria were formulated on the basis of the purpose for the observation and in relation
to the way of recording necessary classroom information and how to analyze the recorded
information easily.

4.2.3. Collegial Supervision

Table.9: Role of Supervisors in Collegial Supervision

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
1 assist teachers to develop the spirit Principal 3.10 1.33
-1.02 .30
of collegiality. Teacher 3.43 1.28
encourage teachers to work Principal 2.90 1.29
2
cooperatively towards their -1.06 .29
Teacher 3.23 1.25
professional growth.
3 encourage teachers to work on the Principal 2.30 1.12
improvement of curriculum -1.27 .20
Teacher 2.65 1.09
cooperatively at school level.
Principal 2.77
Total Mean
Teacher 3.1
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 = Strongly Disagree, 1.51-2.5 = Disagree, 2.51-3.5= Un Decided, 3.51-4.5=
Agree and 4.51 -5.00= Strongly Agree

From the above Table, item 1 of it could be observed the principal and teacher respondents
rated as undecided on the issue that instructional supervisors assist teachers in developing the
spirit of collegiality with the mean scores of M= 3.10; SD= 1.33, and M= 3.43; SD= 1.28
respectively. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = 1.02, p=0.30 indicating that the

67
statistically significance difference was not observed between the respondents of the two
groups. The analysis reveals that the extent to which instructional supervisors assist teachers
to develop the spirit of collegiality was found to be undecided as observed from the response
of the two respondents. Hence, from this data analysis, one can easily understand that
without developing or helping teachers the problem of one teacher can be addressed by other
teachers.

As indicated in the Table 9, item number 2, the response of principal and teacher about the issue
at which instructional supervisors encouraging teachers to work cooperatively towards their
professional growth were rated under undecided with the mean scores M= 2.90; SD= 1.29,
and M= 3.23; SD= 1.25 respectively. The independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = 1.06, p=0.29
indicating that the statistically significant difference was not observed between the
respondents of the two groups. The above analysis reveals that the extent to which
instructional supervisors encourage teachers to work cooperatively towards their professional
growth was found to be undecided as observed from the responses of the two respondents.
This implies that instructional supervisors were not in a better position to meet the need of
teachers to work cooperatively. Therefore, the school supervisors should be use supervisory
approaches to solve such problems and also use supervisory skills according to the nature of
each teacher to get satisfactory response.

The third item in Table 9, aims at investigating the extent to which instructional supervisors
encourage teachers to work on the improvement of curriculum cooperatively at school level.
In this regard, the principals respondents were rated under disagree scale with mean value of
(M= 2.30; SD= 1.12). However, teachers have reported that the supervisory related tasks of
encouraging teachers to work on the improvement of curriculum cooperatively at school
level had undecided level of implementation in their respective schools. The independent t- test
result, t (2, 116) = 1.12, p=0.20 indicating that a statistically significant difference was not
observed between the respondents of the two groups. The above analysis reveals that the
extent to which instructional supervisors encourage teachers to work on the improvement of
the existing curriculum cooperatively at school level was found to be disagreed and
undecided as observed from responses of principals and teachers respectively. This implies
that instructional supervisors could not contribute their expected effort in the desired level.

68
Collegial supervision becomes real when it emerges as a result of a belief of interdependence
among teachers, and when teachers view it as an integral part of their professional
responsibility to help others and to see help from others when needed. Regarding to the
potential efforts to improve supervision problems in table 9 the responses of interviewee and
unstructured item questions site up additional solutions. In this respect, respondent added
varies as a solution. In this respect, responses emphasized by the majority of respondents i.e.
sub city education office and school management should be equally and with accountability,
try to make instructional supervision at school level consistent; develop the work of team and
experience of department heads and senior teacher on instructional supervision and
facilitating experience sharing among schools.

4.2.4. Self-Directed Supervision

Table.10: Role of Supervisors in Self-Directed Supervision

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
encourage effective teachers to Principal 2.80 1.00
1
plan their own and evaluate it by .61 .54
Teacher 2.64 1.10
themselves.
2 encourage teachers for their own Principal 3.30 1.03
1.65 .10
self professional improvement. Teacher 2.91 .95
motivate teachers to keep-up Principal 2.20 .83
3
their moral by promoting sense -.67 .50
Teacher 2.36 1.02
of responsibility.
Principal 2.77
Total Mean Teacher 2.64
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 = Strongly Disagree, 1.51-2.5 = Disagree, 2.51-3.5= Un Decided, 3.51-4.5=
Agree and 4.51 -5.00= Strongly Agree

As can be seen from Table 10 item 1, instructional supervisors encourage effective teachers
to plan their own and evaluate it by themselves with the mean value of principals M= 2.80;
SD=1.00 whereas the teachers mean value M=2.64; SD=1.10 as the figure indicates, the
mean score of principals and teachers about instructional supervisors encourage effective
teachers to plan their own and evaluate it by themselves were undecided. Moreover, the

69
independent t- test result, t (2, 116) = .61, p=0.54 indicating that a statistically significant
difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. This implies that
instructional supervisors did not play their role in helping teachers to develop self-evaluation
intentionally for one’s own self-development in the sampled schools.

Regarding item 2 in the same Table, principals and teachers replied that the extent of
supervisors in encouraging teachers for their own self professional improvement were
undecided with the mean values, M= 3.30; SD= 1.03 and M= 2.91; SD= .95 respectively.
This shows that supervisors did not contribute their role satisfactorily on the encouraging
teachers to strive for their own self-improvement. Therefore, a practice of instructional
supervisors in this respect was negligible. Moreover, the independent t- test result, t (2, 116)
= 1.65, p=0.10 indicating that a statistically significant difference was not observed between
the respondents of the two groups.

Finally, Table 10 item 3 presents question about instructional supervisors who motivate
teachers to keep-up their moral by promoting sense of responsibility. Principals and teachers
replied the role of instructional supervisors in this regard were rated under disagreed with the
mean values, M= 2.20; SD= .83 and M= 2.36; SD= 1.02 respectively. The analysis shows
that the extent to which instructional supervisors motivating teachers to keep-up their moral
by promoting sense of responsibility was found to be not better as observed from the
response of respondents. Therefore, this implies that instructional supervisors were failed on
boosting of the moral of teachers. This can be applied by giving genuine feedback and
financial incentives for prominent tasks and giving full autonomy to teachers themselves to
exercise responsibility on educational quality. Moreover, the independent t- test result, t (2,
116) = .67, p=0.50 indicating that a statistically significant difference was not observed
between the respondents of the two groups.

According to the response of interviewee, in addition to the above listed problems, there were
poor awareness creating programs regarding purposes and objectives of school based
supervision and lack of initiation and commitment of the principals and teachers.

70
4.2.5. Inquiry Based Supervision

Table.11: Role of Supervisors in Inquiry Based Supervision

Item The extent to which instructional Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
supervisors: Group Deviation value Value
show the procedure to teachers Principal 2.50 1.14
1
how to conduct action research in 1.47 .14
Teacher 2.18 .83
school context.
encourage teachers to conduct Principal 3.55 1.14
2
action research to solve the .60 .54
Teacher 3.38 1.19
problem of their school.
provide suitable incentive to those Principal 3.55 1.14
3
who conduct action research to
.60 .54
solve the problem of their school Teacher 3.38 1.19
effectively.
Principal 2.98
Total Mean
Teacher 3.36
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 = Strongly Disagree, 1.51-2.5 = Disagree, 2.51-3.5= Un Decided, 3.51-4.5=
Agree and 4.51 -5.00= Strongly Agree

As it can be seen from Table 11, in the dimension of instructional supervisors show the
procedure to teachers how to conduct action research in school context, as an inquiry based
supervision rated disagreed with mean scores M= 2.50; SD=1.14 and M=2..18; SD= .83 by
principals and teachers respectively. The analysis shows that the extent to which instructional
supervisors show the procedure to teachers how to conduct action research in school context
was found to be not better as observed from the responses of the respondents. The results of
independent sample t- test, t (2, 116) = 1.47; P=0.14, indicating a statistically significant
difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. As a result, one can
easily infer that supervisors did not contribute the role which was expected from them
regarding to the use of action research as a technique of school based supervision.

In the same Table item 2 is about the extent at which instructional supervisors encourage
teachers to conduct action research to solve the problem of their school as an inquiry based
supervision, principals replied that role of supervisors agreed with the mean score of M=
3.55; SD=1.14. Whereas teachers replied the role of supervisors in this case were sometimes

71
with the mean score of M= 3.38; SD=1.19. This implies that even though supervisors did not
show necessary procedures of conducting action research but they initiate teachers to conduct
action research at school level. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 0.60;
p=0.54, depicts that a statistically significance difference was not observed between the
response of the two groups.

Regarding item 3 of Table 11, respondents were asked the extent to which instructional
supervisors provide suitable incentive to those who conduct action research to solve the
problem of their school effectively. To this end, principals replied that role of supervisors
were agreed with the mean score of M= 3.55; SD=1.14. Whereas teachers replied the role of
supervisors in this case were sometimes with the mean score of M= 3.38; SD=1.19.
Therefore, it implies that suitable incentives were provided for teachers somewhat as the
desired level. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 0.60; p=0.54, depicts that a
statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.

4.2.6. Informal Supervision

Table.12: Role of Supervisors in Informal Supervision

Item Instructional supervisors: Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
Group Deviation value Value
are open to discuss with individual Principal 3.05 1.27
1 teachers about the problem of the .75 .45
Teacher 2.83 1.13
school informally
take in to regard the information Principal 3.05 1.27
2
he/she obtain from teachers
informally as it necessity for 1.49 .13
Teacher 2.60 1.20
decision making to modify teaching
programs
Principal 3.05
Total Mean
Teacher 2.72
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 = Strongly Disagree, 1.51-2.5 = Disagree, 2.51-3.5= Un Decided, 3.51-4.5=
Agree and 4.51 -5.00= Strongly Agree

As can be seen in the Table 12 item 1, the principal and teacher respondents were undecided
on the openness of instructional supervisors to discuss with individual teachers about the
problems of the school informally with mean scores M= 3.05; SD=1.27 and M=2.83; SD= 1
72
.13 respectively. Informal supervision is another form of supervisory strategy; which is
supervisory visits the teachers without plan with classroom and out of classroom. Moreover,
the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 0.75; p=0.45, depicts that a statistically significant
difference was not observed between the response of the two groups. However, the extent of
making holding open discussion among supervisors, principals and teachers were not in the
desired level.

Concerning item 2 of the Table 12, the principals and teachers respondents were replied that
they were undecided on the extent to which supervisors take in to regard the information
he/she obtained from teachers informally as its necessity for decision making to modify
teaching learning process with mean scores M= 3.05; SD=1.27 and M=2.60; SD= 1 .20
respectively. But being supervisors open to communicate with teachers is good and also it
will foster free sharing of information to solve problems and modify educational programs at
school level. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 1.49; p=0.13, depicts that a
statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.

4.2.7. Perceptions Principals and Teachers on Educational Supervision

In order to assess whether instructional supervision is perceived either positively or

negatively in both school principals and teachers perception 6 items were raised as follows.

73
Table.13: Perceptions of Principals and Teachers on Educational Supervision
Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
Item Group Deviation value Value
Supervision of teachers improves Principal 3.80 .89
1
the quality of teaching and .89 .37
Teacher 3.57 1.05
learning.
2 Supervision focuses only on weak Principal 3.20 1.32
.20 .84
points of teachers. Teacher 3.14 1.31
3 Supervisors are receptive to new Principal 2.85 1.22
.81 .41
ideas from teachers. Teacher 2.60 1.22
4 Supervision is a means for Principal 3.30 1.21
-.87 .38
controlling teachers. Teacher 3.53 1.04
Principal
Supervisors focus on administrative 3.30 1.21
5 -.85 .39
matters. Teacher 3.55 1.19
6 Any educational officer can be a Principal 3.45 1.09
-.31 .75
supervisor. Teacher 3.54 1.18
Principal 3.32
Total Mean
Teacher 3.32
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 = Strongly Disagree, 1.51-2.5 = Disagree, 2.51-3.5= Un Decided, 3.51-4.5=
Agree and 4.51 -5.00= Strongly Agree

As indicated in Table 13 above the two groups of respondents were requested to rate their
views regarding their perception on supervision of teachers improves the quality of teaching
and learning. Accordingly, the principal and teacher respondents rated as agreed with the
corresponding mean value of, M= 3.80; SD= .89 and M= 3.57; SD= 1.05. Hence, the
respondents have better understanding about the point supervision helps to improve quality
of teaching and learning. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = .89; p=0.37,
depicts that a statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the
two groups.

Item 2 of the same Table on the point supervision focuses only on weak points of teachers,
with the mean scores of M= 3.20; SD= 1.32 and M= 3.14; SD= 1.31, the principals and the
teachers respondents rated undecided on the point supervision focuses only on weak points of
teachers. Therefore, regarding improving teachers’ individual skill and knowledge through

74
direct class room observation was limited. The results of independent sample t- test, t (2,
116) = .20; P=0.84, indicating the statistically significance difference was not observed
between the respondents of the two groups. However, Educational supervision has an
influential factor on teachers to apply effective teaching methodology and improved student
achievements.

Concerning to the item 3 of the Table 13, the principal and the teacher respondents were
replied that they moderately agreed on the point supervisor is receptive to new ideas from
teachers with mean scores M= 2.85; SD=1.22 and M=2.60; SD= 1 .22 respectively. This
indicated that the implementation of educational supervision on the professional development
of teachers in selected secondary schools of Yeka sub city did not practice as expected.
Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = .81; p=0.41, depicts that a statistically
significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups. Therefore, it
needs to give high concern from the sub cites education office and Educational Bureau of
Addis Ababa city administration.

Regarding item 4 of the same above Table on the point that supervision is a means for
controlling teacher to prepare different instructional materials to teaching-learning, the
principal respondents rated as moderately agreed with mean scores M= 3.30; SD=1.21.
While the teacher respondents rated agreed with mean scores M= 3.53; SD=1.04. This
implies that instructional supervisors could not play their supporting role as expected rather
they were focused on controlling activity. The results of independent sample t- test, t (2, 116)
= .87; P=0.38, indicating a statistically significant difference was not observed between the
respondents of the two groups.

In the fifth item of Table 13, the target groups were asked to rate their level of view to the
notion that supervisors focus on administrative matters. Accordingly, the principals
respondents were rated as moderately agreed with mean scores M= 3.30; SD=1.21. While the
teachers respondents rated as agreed with mean scores M= 3.55; SD=1.19. This implies that
instructional supervisors did not play their facilitating role in the school. This is because as
discussed in the literature review, supervisors are facilitators; more than administrative.
Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = .81; p=0.41, depicts that statistically
significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.

75
In the last item of Table 13, the target groups were also asked to rate their level of agreement
to the notion that every educational officer can be a supervisor. Accordingly, the principal
respondents rated moderately agreed with mean scores M= 3.45; SD=1.09. While the teacher
respondents rated agree with mean scores M= 3.54; SD=1.18. This might be due to the lack
of knowledge about the major role and function of school based supervision by the
respondents. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) = 0.31; p=0.75, depicts that a
statistically significant difference was not observed between the response of the two groups.

According to the response of sub city supervisors in their interviewee, in addition to the
above listed problems, there was poor awareness creating programs regarding purposes and
objectives of school based supervision and lack of initiation and commitment of the
principals and teachers.

4.2.8. Major Challenges Related with Practices of Educational Supervision

Any reform initiative requires capacity and available resources for successful
implementation. In this regard, the availability organizational capacity and resources in terms
of supporting, working environment as well as supervisory skill play momentous role. The
following three Tables (Table 14, 15 and 16) will try to describe the challenges encountering
the implementation supervision at government secondary schools.

76
4.2.8.1. Problems Related to the Level of Support of Educational Supervisors

Table.14: Problems Related to the Level of Support of Educational Supervisors

Item The level to which support: Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
Group Deviation value Value
educational supervisors use Principal 2.50 1.14
information for supporting teachers
1 -.80 .42
rather than considering as fault Teacher 2.74 1.21
finding.
educational supervisors are Principal 3.30 1.21
2 incompetent enough to help other .751 .45
Teacher 3.07 1.23
teachers.
there is lack of follow up the Principal 3.30 1.21
3
activities of teachers by the -.109 .91
Teacher 3.33 1.24
supervisors.
Principal 3.03
Total Mean
Teacher 3.05
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high.

On table 14 item 1 educational supervisors use information for supporting teachers rather
than considering as fault finding the principal respondents were asserted as low with the
mean scores M= 2.5; SD=1.14. The mean values of respondents indicated that educational
supervisors have problem use information for supporting teachers rather than considering as
fault finding in the sample school. On the other side, teacher respondents stated that
educational supervisors use information for supporting teachers rather than considering as
fault finding were average with mean values, M= 2.74; SD= 1.21. This indicates that the
educational supervisors use information for supporting teachers rather than considering as
fault finding in sample schools were not clearly practicing in the study schools. Therefore,
we can deduce that educational supervision was not been really practiced in such way that it
assist teachers to improve instructional process. The results of independent sample t- test
were t (2, 116) =0.80; p= 0.42 a statistically significant difference was not observed.

77
As the data indicated in item 2 of Table 13, educational supervisors are incompetent enough
to help other teachers were found moderate with mean values of principals and teachers, M=
3.30; SD= 1.21 and M= 3.07; SD= 1.23 respectively. This indicates that educational
supervisors were not capable enough to assist teachers in sample school. The independent t-
test result, t (2, 116) =0.75; p=0.45, depicts a statistically significant difference was not
observed between the response of the two groups.

Finally, Table 13 item 3 presents question about there is lack of follow up the activities of
teachers by the supervisors. Principals and teachers replied that luck of follow up the
activities of teachers by supervisors were average with the mean scores M= 3.30; SD=1.21
and M=3.33; SD=1.24 respectively. This implies that teachers need continuous follow up by
the supervision in their school to improve their teaching activities for realizing the students’
academic achievement in sample school. The results of independent sample t- test, t (2, 116)
= 0.10; P=0.91, indicating a statistically significant difference was not observed between the
respondents of the two groups.

4.2.8.2. Problems Related to Working Environment

Table.15: Problems Related to Working Environment

Item Respondents Mean Std. T- P-
Group Deviation value Value
There is lack of available transport Principal 2.40 1.09
1 -.62 .53
facilities. Teacher 2.58 1.20
There is shortage of school finance Principal 2.45 1.19
2 -.37 .70
to support supervisor practice. Teacher 2.56 1.22
There are inadequate number of Principal 3.55 1.27
3
supervisors to assist teachers .06 .95
Teacher 3.53 1.20
properly.
4 There is lack of relevant supervision Principal 3.90 1.16
1.06 .28
manual in the school. Teacher 3.59 1.16
Principal 3.07
Total Mean
Teacher 3.24
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high.

78
On table 14 item 1 transport facilities as the major problems for conducting classroom
supervision of instruction was considered. In this regard, the principal respondents asserted
as low with the mean scores M= 2.40; SD=1.09. The mean values of respondents indicated
that educational supervisors have no problem use transport facilities in the sample school.
On the other side, teachers stated that educational supervisors use transport facilities were
average with mean values, M= 2.58; SD= 1.20. This implies that transportation is not
considered as the major challenge for the implementation of supervision. Moreover, the
independent t-test result, t (2, 277) =0.62; p=0.53, depicts a statistically significant difference
was not observed between the response of the two groups.

As shown in Table 15 item, 2 respondents were asked if there would be shortage of school
finance to support supervisory practices. Accordingly, the principal respondents asserted as
low with the mean scores M= 2.45; SD=1.19. The mean values of respondents indicated that
instructional supervisors have no shortage of school finance to support supervisory practices
in the sample school. On the other side, teachers stated that shortage of school finance to
support supervisory practices were average with mean values, M= 2.56; SD= 1.22. This
implies supervisors could not have financial problem to provide different training for
teachers and also providing different teaching aids for teachers to improve their teaching
skills and implementing the approach of teaching by doing. Moreover, the independent t-test
result, t (2, 116) =0.37; p=0.70, depicts that statistically significant difference was not
observed between the response of the two groups. However, due to the lack of competence
supervisors that belong to in the sample school did not give proper supervisory support for
teachers.

In line with this, MoE (2012) noted supervisors need to have knowledge to determine
strategic change requirements and opportunities: to support school’s principals and teachers
in developing, implementing and evaluating change strategies. Besides, the data which
obtained from respondents confirmed that school finance was assigned for supervisory
practices.

In the same Table item 3 is about the existence of inadequate number of supervisors to assist
the school teachers properly for supervision activities, principals and teachers replied that
inadequate number of supervisors highly challenge with the mean score of M= 3.55;

79
SD=1.27 and M=3.53; SD=1.20 correspondingly. This implies that school had no sufficient
supervisors to assist teachers properly. Moreover, the independent t-test result, t (2, 116) =
0.63; p=0.95, depicts that statistically significant difference was not observed between the
response of the two groups.

In line with this, interview held with officers asserted that absences of competent supervisors
hindered to conduct sound supervision practices in schools and their numbers were
considered as basic challenge.

In the last item of Table 15, respondents were asked whether or not the supervision manual
was available in their schools. Principal and teacher replied that lack of relevant supervision
manual in the school were high challenge for instructional supervisor with the mean scores
M= 3.90; SD=1.16 and M=3.59; SD=1.16 respectively. The analysis shows that the extent to
which lack of supervision manuals in the targeted schools was high. The results of
independent sample t- test, t (1, 116) = 1.06; P=0.28, indicating a statistically significant
difference was not observed between the respondents of the two groups. Therefore, if there
was no supervision manual in the school, there might not be common understanding among
instructional supervisor, school principals and teachers about the science of instructional
supervision and hence inefficient would be the supervision.

4.2.8.3. Problems that Arise from Supervisors

Table.16: Problems that Arise from Supervisors

Items Responden Std.Devi T- P-

ts Group Mean ation value Value
Instructional Supervisors lack skill Principal 3.20 1.32
in applying techniques of -1.24 .21
1 Teacher 3.56 1.15
supervision.
Supervisors use less participative Principal 2.20 .95
2 -2.18 .03
approach. Teacher 2.76 1.06
Lack of adequate educational Principal 3.30 1.21
3 experiences is observed on the part .98 .32
Teacher 3.00 1.24
of supervisors.
Principal 2.90
Total Mean
Teacher 3.10

80
W.M weighed mean, Significant level =0.05, t-critical value =1.99, Mean scores less than or
equal to 1.51 =very low, 1.51-2.5=low, 2.51-3.5=Average, 3.51-4.5=High and 4.51 -
5.00=very high.

As it can be seen from Table 16, instructional supervisors lack skill in applying techniques of
supervision was considered. In this regard, the principal respondents asserted as moderate
with the mean scores M= 3.20; SD=1.32. The mean values of respondents indicated that
educational supervisors lack skill in applying techniques of supervision. On the other side,
teacher stated that educational supervisors lack skill in applying techniques of supervision
were high with mean values, M= 3.56; SD= 1.15. This implies that it is difficult to say that
educational supervision is serving its very purpose of assisting teachers. Moreover, the
independent t-test result, t (2, 116) =1.24; p=0.21, depicts that statistically significant
difference was not observed between the response of the two groups. However, now a day,
supervision of instruction is providing assistance to teachers with the ultimate benefit of
learners and it is clear that supervisory skill is very crucial for those who apply in different
techniques of educational supervision.

With respect to educational supervisors use more participative approach Table 16 item 2, the
mean value of principals M= 2.20; SD=.95 whereas the teachers men value M=2.77;
SD=1.06 as the figure indicates the mean score of principals and teachers rated as low and
moderate respectively. This implies that educational supervisors were lacking human relation
skills or communication skills for providing necessary feedback to improve the teaching
learning process. Moreover, the results of independent sample t- test, t (2, 116) = 2.18;
P=0.88, indicating a statistically significant difference was not observed between the
respondents of the two groups.

Work experience as challenge for practices of educational supervision on Table 13 item 3,

the mean value of principals M= 3.78; SD=1.13 whereas the teachers men value M=3.88;
SD=1.01 as the figure indicates the mean score of principals and teachers is found at the
upper limit of cut point or agreement scale which is near to the response of high. From this
data work experience has high influence on the practices of educational supervision by
supervisors. The independent sample t- test were t (2, 277) =0.77; p= 0.43 the statistically
significant difference was not observed the two group respondents.

81
As shown in Table 16 item 3, pertaining to lack of adequate educational experiences on the
part of supervisors, principals and teachers replied educational experience of supervisors
were average with the mean scores M= 3.30; SD=1.21 and M=3.00; SD=1.24 respectively.
This implies that supervisors that belong to the Yeka sub city education office were well
experienced. Therefore, supervisors were not facing lack of experiences especially with
instructional supervision. The results of independent sample t- test, t (2, 116) =. 98; P=0.32,
indicating the statistically significant difference was not observed between the respondents of
the two groups.

82
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter deals with summary, conclusions and recommendations. The first part presents
the highlights of the context for the research undertakings and the major findings while the
second and the third parts cover the conclusions reached and the recommendations suggested
respectively.

5.1. Summary

Instructional supervision is a means for achieving effectiveness in professional development

of teachers, curriculum development, and ultimately signifies to students learning through
teacher improvement of classroom teaching learning activities. Thus, the supervision at the
school level helps teachers to be competent in their teaching learning activities; it encourages
them to find suitable strategies for better students learning. Therefore, the central purpose of
this study was to assess status of the Practices and Problems of Educational Supervision in
Government Secondary Schools of Yeka Sub City in Addis Ababa City Administration. To
achieve the purpose, the researcher formulates the following four research questions.

1. To what level educational supervision has been practiced by supervisors in terms of

its major domains (instructional development, curriculum development, and staff
development)?

2. What enabling conditions exist for facilitating the practices of instructional

supervision?

3. How do principals and teachers perceive on educational supervision service in the

study area?

4. What are the major challenges involved in the educational supervision?

To this effect, the study was conducted in 5 government secondary schools. Consequently,
100 teachers and 20 school principals were selected as a sample by using simple random and
purposive sampling techniques respectively. Three sub city education office supervisors and
2 sub city education office supervision coordinators were taken as a sample through
purposive sampling technique. For this study, primary and secondary data sources were

83
employed. The data was gathered through both quantitative and qualitative tools.
Accordingly, 100 copies of a questionnaire were prepared and distributed for teachers and 20
copies of questionnaires for school principals. From the distributed questionnaires, only
4(4.16%) teachers from the total did not return the questionnaires. On the other hand, to
obtain qualitative data, interview sessions were conducted with the Sub City Education
Office supervision coordinators and supervisors. Moreover, document analyses were used to
obtain qualitative data.

Descriptive survey method was employed and both primary and secondary source of data
were found to be adequate to reach at sound findings.

Then to collect data from respondents self-developed questionnaire was used to comprising
both open and closed ended items and distributed to the targeted groups. To triangulate the
information, data were also collected from Yeka sub-city Education office Teachers’ and
School leaders’ development process owner experts and supervisors through interview and
document analysis also made for further investigation.

In the study, the data collected through questionnaire (quantitative) were tallied, tabulated,
structured and described using tables and different data analysis tools such as mean values,
average mean values, and an independent simple t-test for comparing means and spearman’s
correlation were used. In analyzing it, the mean values that were found below 2.51 were
interpreted as “threat”, while the mean values above 3.50 were interpreted as “opportunity”.
In between, the mean values that range from 2.51-3.50 were considered as medium /average/
moderate.

The data obtained from interviews and document analysis (qualitative) were qualitatively
analyzed and synchronized with the quantitative data according to their relevance. Finally,
both the quantitative and qualitative data were interwoven in the analysis to get a complete
picture of the findings. Another worth mentioning aspect of this research was ethical
considerations. In this regard due attention was given to ethical considerations. Participants
were given full information on the purpose of the study and their consents were secured
ahead of time. As promised, their identity and responses remained confidential.

84
5.1.1. Major Findings

In brief the following findings have been documented in response to the basic research
questions:

5.1.1.1. Implementation of Educational Supervision

The first basic question raised in this research was about the level of educational supervision
implementation by supervisors in terms of its major domains (instructional development,
curriculum development, and staff development).

 Instructional Development Domain

The data obtained from principal and teacher respondents shows that there were moderate
implementation of instructional supervision practices in instructional development with average
mean values of 2.91 and 2.70 respectively in their school. The following paragraphs portray the
findings of the study in this regard:

a) Teachers believe that the level to which instructional supervisors help teachers
develop skills of applying different assessment and measurement techniques through
organizing in-service training were lays undecided with the average mean value 2.51.

b) Principals believe that the level to which instructional supervisors assist teachers in
identifying locally available teaching and learning resources, provide immediate
feedback to teachers particularly after lesson observation and help teachers in
identifying instructional problems lays undecided with the average mean value 3.45,
2.55 and 2.95 respectively.

c) As data gathered from principals and teachers on the level to which instructional
supervisors help to organize meetings for teachers to solve common instructional
problems perceived as medium with average mean values of 3.40 and 2.59
respectively.

d) The results gained from the research participants that were consulted through
interviews had shown similar views with the information gathered through
questionnaires. Discussants openly portrayed teachers did not gain the expected
support to improve their instructional support (to set up experimental class room,

85
 develop different assessment techniques, identifying and to solve common
instructional problem) from the supervisors.

 Curriculum Development Domain

The data obtained from both groups of respondents’ shows that there were effective
implementation of instructional supervision practices in curriculum development with average
mean values of 2.88 and 2.86 respectively in their school. The following paragraphs portray the
findings of the study in this regard:

a) The data gathered from principals and teachers respondents about the level to which
instructional supervisors; collecting and providing necessary educational material that
is suppurating to the existing curriculum, rated as medium with the mean scores, M=
2.70 and M= 2.77 respectively.

b) Similarly, data obtained from the two groups of respondents stated the level to which
instructional supervisors help teachers to integrate the existing curriculum with the
co-curricular activities was medium with the mean score of M= 3.25 and M= 2.98
respectively.

c) Serious concerns were also raised on the difficulty level of the curriculum used. The
data gathered through interviews from the experts of Yeka sub city education office
expressed serious concerns with regard to curriculum development practices in the
school. Moreover, the experts fully admitted the insufficient practices of curriculum
development activities supported by supervisors in the school.

 Staff Development Domain

The overall examination of items in the dimension of instructional supervision to staff

development was rated as moderately practiced by supervisors with the average mean values of
2.51 by principals and teachers respectively. This data show that the instructional supervisors
have less practiced for instructional development with the school teachers and school community.
The following paragraphs portray the findings of the study in this regard:

a) On the extent to which the practice of supervisors in giving the latest information on
the teaching learning strategies that enhance teachers’ profession and in providing an

86
 induction program for new teachers as data gathered from principals and teachers
perceived as medium in staff development.

b) Principals believe that the level to which instructional supervisors assist teachers to
conduct action research, helps teachers to share best practices from different schools
and providing short-term training at school level lay moderately practiced with the
average mean value 2.85, 2.95 and 2.55 respectively

5.1.1.2. The practices of Instructional Supervision

The second major question raised in this research refers to the enabling condition that exists
facilitating for the practice of instructional supervision. At the hub of this question, the
supporting strategies of instructional supervisors like the strategies of clinical supervision
and the other perspectives about supervisory approaches employed for the practices of
instructional supervision were addressed.

5.1.1.2.1. Clinical Supervision

The findings related to the practice of the major stages of clinical supervision by instructional
supervisors in the study areas were disclosed as follows:

 Pre-Observation stage

Finding related to supervisory activity during pre-observation stage in the studied areas was
found to be practiced sometimes with the average mean value (M= 2.83 and M= 2.98) of
principals and teachers respondents respectively. This shows that both groups of respondents had
how much school were suffering inadequacy of resources supply by their respective schools.

The following paragraphs portray the findings of the study in this regard:

a) As the response of teachers, the extent to which instructional supervisors conducting

pre-observation conference with supervisee teachers, was found to be some times with
the average mean value of M= 2.90.

b) The extent to which instructional supervisors; analyze the lesson plan of the
supervisee teacher before classroom visit and making agreement with teachers on the
objectives and methods of presentation were also rated as some times.

87
 c) However, as stated clearly in the supervision manual of Ministry of Education (MoE,
1994) every classroom observation should be implemented based on a clearly stated
certain criteria and should be known by the supervisee before the supervisors carry
out classroom observation.

 Observational stage

With regarding to the dimension of observational stage of clinical supervision, the gathered
data revealed that the instructional supervisors were agreed in practicing class room observation
in their schools as witnessed by two groups of respondents with the average mean values of 2.90
and 2.72 correspondingly. As result instructional supervisors practice,

a) Record important data on the teaching learning process and how the teacher and
students are performing and use the agreed upon procedures to collect the relevant
data pertaining the instructional process during class room observation were not
frequently practice of instructional supervisors witnessed by the two groups of
respondents.

b) Moreover, taking sufficient time for observing the teachers teaching behaviour during
classroom observation according to the pre-conference discussion were poorly
practiced by instructional supervisors witnessed by the principals and teachers
respondents.

c) Moreover, since teaching learning process is continuous and holds various activities;
observing specific parts of the classroom observation cannot enable to know the
detailed performance of the supervisee teacher (MoE, 1994).

 Post-Observation stage

From the result of data analysis, the practice of post observational stage of clinical supervision
was also revealed that agree with the average mean values of 3.07 and 2.78 by instructional
supervisors. These averages mean values implies that instructional supervisors are not effectively
practice the activity of clinical supervision in post observational stage. As result the extent at
which instructional supervisors,

a) Analyze the recorded data in terms of established objectives and discuss with the
supervisee teacher on the data collected during post observational stage were not

88
 frequently practice of instructional supervisors witnessed by the two groups of
respondents. Moreover, conducting post-observation conference was poorly practiced
by instructional supervisors witnessed by the principals and teachers respondents.

b) As a result, all (3) supervisors in the interview session stated that the they did not
make mutual agreements with each supervisee on the purpose for the classroom
observation, or for a suitable time; nor for the data which was to be collected during
the observation.

5.1.1.2.2. Collegial Supervision

As obtained data from the two groups of respondents, concerning supportive role of instructional
supervisors that encourage collegial supervision occurs some times as reported by their average
mean values of 2.77 and 3.1 respectively. This may show that the principals and teachers felled to
agree ineffective performance in the encouraging collegial supervision to support teachers as it
help is needed. The following paragraphs portray the findings of the study in this regard:

a) The data obtained from the response of principals and teachers about the extent to which
instructional supervisors; to assist teachers to develop the spirit of collegiality and
encourage teachers to work cooperatively towards their professional growth.as witnessed
were moderately implemented in the dimension by both group of respondents’ response.

b) As the data obtained from the response of principals about the extent to which
instructional supervisors to encourage teachers to work on the improvement of
curriculum cooperatively at school level was found to be disagreed with the average
mean value, M= 2.30 whereas teachers replied that undecided on the issue about
instructional supervisors to encourage teachers to work on the improvement of
curriculum cooperatively at school level with the average mean value M= 2.65.

5.1.1.2.3. Self-directed Supervision

Both groups of the respondents believed that concerning to the overall judgment on the
practices of self-directed supervision found to be inadequately encouraged by instructional
supervisors in their school with average mean values of 2.77 and 2.64 respectively. In line
with this, the findings disclosed:

89
 a) The data obtained from principals and teachers respondents about the extent to which
instructional supervisors encourage effective teachers and to plan their own and
evaluate it by themselves and also encourage teachers for their own self professional
improvement were found to be undecided.

b) However, the extent to which instructional supervisors motivating teachers to keep-it

up their moral by promoting sense of responsibility was found to be dis agree as
responded by the two groups of respondents with the average mean value of M= 2.20
and M= 2.36 respectively.

c) According to the response of interviewee, there were poor awareness creating

programs regarding purposes and objectives of school based supervision and lack of
initiation and commitment of the principals and teachers.

5.1.1.2.4. Inquiry-based Supervision

The obtained data showed that both groups of respondents (principals and teachers) understood
that concerning to the overall judgment on the practices of inquiry based supervision found to be
not effectively implemented by instructional supervisors with average mean values of 2.8 and
3.36 respectively. In line with this, the findings disclosed:

a) principals and teachers with the average mean scores (3.38) indicated that,
instructional supervisors do not properly encourage teachers to conduct action
research to solve the problem of their school and insufficiently provide suitable
incentive to those who conduct action research to solve the problem of their school
effectively.

b) On the other hand, instructional supervisors do not show the procedure how to
conduct action research in school context for their teachers as the total mean scores
failed on (M= 2.50 and M= 2.18) correspondingly.

5.1.1.2.5. Informal Supervision

Based on the findings of the study, the majority of, principals and teachers responded that,
instructional supervisors do not regularly practice any informal supervision of teachers in
their schools with (M= 3.05) and (M= 2.72) mean scores respectively. In line with this, the
findings disclosed:

90
 a) On the extent which instructional supervisors are open to discuss with individual
teachers about the problem of the school informally; principals and teachers with (M=
3.05) and (M= 2.83) mean scores respectively indicated that instructional supervisors
have communication gaps with teachers in the ongoing classroom teaching learning
process.

b) On the other hand, both groups of respondents moderately agreed instructional

supervisors take in to regard the information he/she obtain from teachers informally
as it necessity for decision making to modify teaching programs with the average
mean of M= 3.05 and M= 2.60 respectively.

5.1.1.3. Perceptions of Principals and Teachers on Educational Supervision

The third basic question was concerning about the view /level of understanding/ of
respondents towards the concepts educational supervision with regard to the role of
supervisors that helps in improving the quality of education. This was aimed at to what
extent, in relation to how principals and teachers regard supervision as well as what they
expect and need from supervision.

On the extent which respondents views toward supervision is neither negative nor positive;
principals and teachers with the same (M=3.32), mean scores. This indicated that
instructional supervisors insufficiently identify the student teaching and learning, evaluation,
measurement skill gaps of teachers in the ongoing classroom teaching learning process.
Based on this, principals and teachers respondents gave their opinions as follows:

a) Based on the findings of the study, the majority of principals and teachers
respondents were oriented and aware about supervision focuses only on weak points
of teacher activities and tend to believe that a supervisor should not be receptive to
new ideas from teachers

b) On the other hand, the majority of the teacher respondents do seem to believe that
supervision is a means for controlling teachers, the aim of supervision focus on
administrative matters and any education officers can be a supervisor. However,
supervision is a means of supporting teachers and principals for better learner
achievements, it should be mainly focuses on facilitating the ongoing teaching

91
 learning process and it is a profession practiced by well-trained supervisors in the
field of supervision.

c) As a result of sub city supervisors in their interviewee, there were poor awareness
creating programs regarding purposes and objectives of school based supervision and
lack of initiation and commitment of the principals and teachers.

5.1.1.4. Major Challenges Related with Practices of Educational Supervision

Finally, the fourth basic question was concerning about challenges encountered in the
implementation of educational supervision that affected supervisory practices in the study
sites. At the hub of this question, the major causes of challenges of instructional supervisors
like problems related to the level of support of supervisors and working environment and
problems arise from the supervisors him/herself were addressed.

5.1.1.4.1. Problems Related to Level of Support of Educational Supervisors

The data gathered from principals and teachers respondents in overall assessment of items
revealed that the challenges of educational supervision perceived the level of support of
instructional supervisor were rated as moderately challenged practice of instructional supervision
effectiveness with average mean values of 3.03 and 3.05 respectively. This indicated that the
level of instructional supervisors do not satisfactory to improve the skill gap of teachers in
the study area. Because, finding disclosed:

a) Concerning to educational supervisors use information for supporting teachers rather than
considering as fault finding rated moderately challenged the practices of instructional
supervision effectiveness with mean values of 2.74 by teachers’ respondents. Whereas
principals respondents replied that the challenges related to level of support of
supervisors were poor in use of information for supporting teachers rather than
considering as fault finding with mean values of 2.50

b) The level of support of educational supervisors in terms of competent enough to help

other teachers and lack of follow up the activities of teachers were somewhat a problem
that challenged the practices of instructional supervision effectiveness.

92
5.1.2.4.2. Problems Related to Working Environments

Regarding to the overall challenges related working environments, the study revealed that
principal and teacher respondents rated as moderately challenged the practice of educational
supervision effectiveness were with the average mean values of 3.07 and 3.24 respectively.
Because, finding disclosed:

a) Principal’s respondents revealed that lack of available transport facilities was not
challenged the effectiveness of the practices of educational supervision with average
mean values of 2.40. While teachers respondents revealed that lack of available
transport facilities rated as moderately challenged the effectiveness of the practices of
educational supervision with average mean values of 2.58.

b) In the same way, principal respondents revealed that shortage of school finance was
not challenged to support supervisor in practicing effective supervision with average
mean values of 2.45. While teacher respondents revealed that shortage of school
finance was moderately challenged to support supervisor in practicing effective
supervision with average mean values of 2.56.

c) On the other hand, both group of respondents revealed that inadequate number of
supervisors and lack of relevant supervision manual in the school were highly
challenged to assist teachers properly in practicing effective supervision.

d) Interview held with officers asserted that absences of competent supervisors were
hindered to conduct sound supervision practices in schools and their numbers were
considered as basic challenge.

5.1.1.4.3. Problems that Arise from Supervisors

Concerning a problem that arises from supervisors her/himself, the study revealed that
principals and teachers respondents rated as moderately challenged the practice of educational
supervision effectiveness were with the average mean values of 2.90 and 3.10 respectively.
Because, finding disclosed:

a) Regarding to the challenges of the practice of supervision that arise from educational
supervisors of the sampled schools, the study revealed that principals replied that lack
of skill in applying techniques of supervision was moderately challenged the practice
93
 of instructional supervision effectiveness with the average mean values of 3.20. On
the contrary, teacher respondents replied that lack of skill in applying techniques of
supervision by supervisors was highly challenged the practice of instructional
supervision effectiveness in their schools with the average mean values of 3.56.

b) On the other hand, the study revealed that principals and teachers replied that relevant
trainings had not taken by supervisors and supervisors’ lack adequate educational
experiences on the part of supervisors were moderately challenged the practice of
instructional supervision effectiveness.

c) Teacher respondents regarding to item #3 (Supervisors’ use of less participative

approach) was rated as moderately challenged instructional leadership effectiveness
with mean value of 3.30 and 3.00 respectively.

As a whole, the challenges that affected supervisory practices in the study sites were found to
be instructional supervisors incompetent enough to help other teachers, lack of follow up the
activities of teachers by the supervisors, inadequate number of supervisors to assist the
school teachers properly, lack of relevant supervision manual in the school, lack of skill in
applying techniques of supervision and use of less participative approach. All these are
presumed factors that could hamper the activities of effective supervision in secondary
schools of the study area. As a result, school teachers do not see any worthwhile support
rendered by supervisors and school-based supervision was less supportive for effective
teaching and learning process.

5.2. Conclusions

Based on the findings the following conclusions were drawn:

a) Literature and experiences have shown that, supervisors encourage wide

participations in policy determining functions and seek to have participant see the
significance of their emotions, as well as facts. However educational supervision in
the study area should not be centered on teaching quality through selecting the best
available teacher and providing for teacher‘s personal development.

b) In the implementation instructional development the function of supervisors are to

assist teachers in developing and improving instructional skills and the supervisor

94
 may help teachers in the selection of appropriate resources and strategies of
presentation as well as by helping them to organize their presentations. Against these,
it could be concluded that teachers did not gain proper instructional development
support from supervisors in order to improve their instructional skills and yet
teachers’ instructional skills remain unchanged in the sampled schools.

c) The failure of supervisors to initiate teacher to identify curriculum problems or

suggest problems that might be interest to them to be studied, provide time, facilities,
and resource when teachers perform their task of curriculum development were
depicted as the major challenges that impede the implementation of curriculum
development as well as the benefits that could be gained from the curriculum
development.

d) The conditions enabling the practice of clinical supervision might not benefit teachers
sufficiently. Furthermore, it could not enable teachers to clearly understand the
purpose of classroom observation. Because of this, teachers develop sense of
insecurity, tension, frustration and negative feeling towards classroom observation.
As a result it is difficult to say that the practice really served its purpose rather it
seems simply a matter of appraising teachers and fulfilling the formality.

e) The endeavors made as well as the results achieved in carrying out the major tasks of
supervision (direct assistance, curriculum development, group development,
professional development, and action research) to enhance the quality of teachers was
weak and others supervisory roles or responsibility thus supervisors were not
shouldering their responsibility to provision of quality supervision in the study site.
Evidently, this has been eroding the practice of supervision as well as the
improvements expected from the intervention of supervisors in the teaching learning
activities of principals and teachers.

f) Finally, school-based supervision was negatively affected by many problems; such

as: the incapability of school-based supervisors for effective supervisory activities,
use of less participative approach; the scarcity of experienced supervisors in school-
based supervision activity; the negative perception of teachers towards supervision
such as fault finding, viewing supervision as instrument of controlling their activity,

95
 viewing supervision as simple merely for appraising classroom performance of
teachers and fulfilling formality, and lack of interest on the side of teachers to be
supervised; and the absence of any supervision manual in the school, are the major
ones.

In conclusion, the overall practice of secondary school supervision and the improvements
gained from supervisors were not to the expected level. Most of the major aspects of the
supervision domains were not fully implemented or only partly implemented and
consequently the very objectives of supervision were compromised. Thus, without effective
implementation of supervision the expected improvements in quality of education and
students’ academic achievement cannot be enhanced.

5.3. Recommendations

In consideration of the findings and conclusions drawn from the study, the following possible
areas of intervention are suggested.

a) Supervisors need to be engaged in various supervisory support activities to provide an

opportunity to promote teachers efficiency in schools. They should help teachers to
deal with suitable educational practices.

b) Educational supervision is a requirement to be practiced in schools as a means to

meet the individual needs of the teacher for the sake of instructional improvement.
Therefore, a wider variety of supervisory options should be provided for teachers. To
this end, it is recommended that for educational supervisors to create an opportunity
for teachers need to be engaged in various curriculum development activities since
they are the implementer of the curriculum.

c) On the other hand, educational supervisors are less likely to achieve instructional
effectiveness through classroom observation unless they have conducted pre-
observation conference properly to develop between them mutual understanding and
feeling of trust and confidence. Thus, educational supervisors should call for pre-
observation conference periodically and consistently. Post- observation conference
between a supervisor and a teacher should be held consistently and immediately after
classroom observation before developing in them a feeling of anxiety and frustration.

96
 Supervisor in post- observation conference should provide teachers with specific
performance feedback; should allow them to express their feelings freely, should
render them constructive suggestions and professional support and advice to help
them to improve; and finally supervisor expressing appreciation for the conference
and the work of teachers.

d) Educational supervision succeeds through cooperation and commitment of teachers

and supervisors. Because, it enables teachers why, where, how and on what subjects
he/she is going to be supervised, if its approach is meaningful.

e) The findings of the study revealed that, instructional supervisors do not regularly
identify the strength and limitations of teachers in the classroom in order to design
appropriate intervention. To this end, the sub city education office and Addis Ababa
City Administration Education Bureau in collaboration with Ministry of Education
and other voluntary organizations must provide training for instructional supervisors
on how to identify the strength and limitations of teachers in the classroom and how
to design appropriate intervention like on the abilities to manage students in the
classroom; student evaluation skills; school self-evaluation techniques; developing
and using of instructional materials and on conducting action research to solve the
day to day instructional problems and effectively implement curriculum.

f) The Addis Ababa City Administration Education Bureau should monitor and evaluate
whether or not the proper supervision are being implemented in the school, and
provide constructive feedback for sub city supervisors, facilitators and the schools
principals.

g) Finally, to better address the problems, the researcher recommends that a more detail
and comprehensive studies need to be conducted in this area with regard to practices
and challenges of instructional supervision in secondary schools; principals and
teachers perception on the instructional supervisory practices and conduct a similar
study on way contribution of supervision on students’ academic achievement, etc. to
investigate and further strengthen the practices of instructional supervision in the
Addis Ababa City Administration.

97
 Reference

Adepoju, T. L. (1998). Fundamental of School Administration, Planning and

Supervision. Nigeria, Ibadan: Alafas Nigeria.

Ani, C.I. (2007). Dynamics of school supervision. Enugu: Cheston Books.

Baba, I. A.(2010). Supervisory Strategies As Correlate Of Quality Education Among

Secondary Schools In Ibadan Southwest Local Government Area Of Oyo State. An
Unpublished Med Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Blumberg, A. (1980). Supervisors and teachers: A private cold war. Berkeley, CA:
McCutchan Publishing.

Boissiere, M. 2004. Determinants of Primary Education Outcomes in Developing

Countries. Washington DC: World Bank.

Canner. (1987). Inspecting and the inspectorate. Rontledge and Kegan Panl ltd.

Carron, G., De Grauwe, A. and Govinda, R. (1998a). Supervision and Support Services in
Asia.Volume I: A Comparative Analysis Paris: UNESCO/International Institute for
Educational Planning.

Clayton, H (1994). Creating an effective vision for primary school. In B.davies and
L.Ellison Eds.

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research planning, conducting and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

De Grauwe, A. (2001). Supervision in four African countries: Challenges and reforms.

Paris: IIEP/UNESCO.

De Grauwe, A.; Bernard, D . eds (2001). Developments after fomite: EFA in the South-
East Asia and Pacific Region. Paris, UNESCO/IIEP.

Dull, L.W., 1981. Supervision: School Leadership Hand Book. Ohio: Charles E. Merrin
Publishing Company.

Eye, G.G., Netzer, L.A., and Krey, R.D. (1971). Supervision of Instructions (2nd
edition).New York: Harper and Row.

98
Fischer, C. F. (2011). Supervision of Institution. Retrieved April 12th, 2013, from
http://www.stanswartz.com/adminbook/chap3.htm.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1990). Supervisory leadership: Introduction to instructional supervision.

Glickman, et al. (1998). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Perspective. Boston:

Allyn and Bacon.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2004).Supervision and

instructional Leadership: A developmental approach. USA: Pearson Education,
Inc

Goldhammer, R., Anedrson, R.H., and Krajewski, R. J. (1980). Clinical supervision

(2ndEdition). New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Good, Carter, V. (1973). Dictionary of Education: New York: McGrew-Hill, book

Company.

Govinda, R. and Tapan S. (1999). Quality Education through School Based Supervision
and Support: The case of GSS primary schools in Bangladesh. Paris:

Gurnam, K. S., & Chan, Y. F. (2010).Formative supervision of teaching and learning:

Issues and concerns for the school head. European Journal of Scientific Research,
39(4), 589-605. UNESCO/International Institute for Educational Planning.

Gwynn, J.M. (1961). Theory and Practice of Supervision. Dodd, Mead and Company, Inc.

Hallingerip(1985).“Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals”

Elementary school journal Vol 86. No 2, pp. 217 – 247

Harris, B. M., 1975. Supervisory Behavior in education. Engle Wood Cliffs:Prentice-

Hanll, Inc.

Holmes,G.(1993) Essential school leadership developing vision and purpose in

management. London: kogan page Limited Instuctional leader ship atraing module
of pricipals ,supervisors and education office U.S.I.D/ I.Q.P.E.P August
2012.Instructional Leadership M.O.E November, 2013 Addis Ababa.

99
Inyega, J. O. (1997). Primary school administrative constraints in the 8-4-4 system, with
special reference to the headteachers. Kisii district case study. M. ED
Thesis,Nairobi: Kenyatta University.

Knezevich, Stephen J. (1969). Administration of Public Education 2nded. New York:

Harper and Row Publishers.

Kochhar, S. K. (2002). Secondary School Administration. New Delhi: Steering

Publication.

Krug, S.E. (1992). “instructional leadership a constructivist perspective.” Educational

Administration quarterly. Vol. 28, No. 3, pp.430-443 Krishanaswami O.R.
(2001). Methodology of Research in Social Sciences. Delhi: Himalaya Publishing
House.

Kwong, Y. F. (1992). A descriptive study of clinical supervision in an aided secondary

school.

Retrieved from www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/en/cuma/92yfkwong/conclusion.htm,

December18, 2006.

Jocobson, p.B.J.D.Logsden and R.R Wingman (1973). The principal ship: New
perspectives. New Jersey: printics-Hall,Inc.

Loganbill, C., Hardy, E., & Delworth, U. (2002). Supervision: A conceptual model. The
Counselling psychologist, 10(1), 3-42.

Lockheed, M.E. & Verspoor, A.M. (1991). Improving primary education in developing
countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Lovell, J. T. and K. wiles, 1983. Supervision for Better Schools. 5th Edition. New Jersey:
Engle wood cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Lucio, W.H. and J. D. Mc Neil, 1979. Supervision in Thought and Action, Los Angeles:
MC Graw-Hall, Inc.

MOEST (2003). Free Primary Education: Every child in school. MOEST, Nairobi.

100
MOEST (2004). School empowerment programme for primary school teachers: head
teachers’ module. Nairobi: Government Printer.

Mohanty, J., 1996. Inspection and school Organization. New York: Sambalpur.

Nelson, B; Hammeram, J. (1996). Re conceptualizing teaching: moving toward the

creation of intellectual communities of students, teachers and teacher
educators'. In: M. McLaughlin and I. Oberman. Teacher learning: new policies,
new practices. New York: Teachers' College Press.

Nyarko, J. S. (2009). Perceptions on head teachers’ supervisory competencies in public

basic schools in the Kwaebibirem district in the Eastern region of Ghana. [Online]
Retrieved on 24th May 2013 from
http://www.ir.ucc.edu.gh/dspace/handle/123456789/1155?mode=full.

Ogunsaju, S. (1983). Educational supervision: Perspectives and practices in Nigeria. Ile-

Ife: University Press Ltd.

Okumbe, J.A. (2001). Human resourse management. An Educational Perspective. Nairobi:

Educational Development and Research Bureau.

Olembo, J.O., Wanga, P.E.,and Karagu, N.M. (1992). Management in Education.Nairobi:

Education Research and Publication.

Oliva, Peter. F. (1997) Supervision for Today's Schools 5thed. New York; Addison wesley
Longman. Inc.

Oliva, P. F. (2001). Developing the curriculum. Retrieved from media.wiley.com/product_

data/excerpt/53/04711516/0471151653.pdf February 4.2006.

Pierce, R. A. and Rowell, J. S. ( 2005). Effective supervision: A Developmental Approach.

Segun, O. (2010). Educational supervision: Perspective and practice in Nigeria. Ile

Ife:University of Ile Ife.

Sergiovanni, T., J. (1995) The Principal ship Reflective practice Perspective (3rd edition)
Boston: Ally and Bacon

101
Sergiovanni, T. J., &Starratt, R. J. (2002). Supervision: (7th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies Inc

Tanner . (1994). School Effectiveness and School Improvement. London: British Library
tools and techniques. oxford: oxford cataloging in publication data.

Van Deventer, I. and Kruger, A.G. (2003). An Educator’s Guide to School Management
Skills. Pretoria: Van Schaik

The Walles Foundation (2011). The School principals as Leaders: Guiding school to
Teaching and Learning. New York: NY10001.

Wiles, K., 1967. Supervision for Better Schools. New Jersey. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Engle
Wood Cliffs.

Wiles, S.V. and Lovell, F.B. (1982). Supervision in teacher education. Ontario: Austin
Mary.

Wilson (1996). 'The role of the Thai inspectorate in the management, monitoring and
supervision of the teachers' in: ACEID, op.cit., pp. 252-254.

102
 Unpublished

Anberber Mengesha (1969). The Aim of Supervision before the Revolution and prospects
of Supervision in Socialist Ethiopia "Addis Ababa University".

Ayalew Shibeshi. (1991). Approaches to Educational Organization and Management

Addis Ababa: AAU.

Birhane Assefa. (2014).The Practice and Challenges of Instructional Supervision in

Asosa Zone Primary Schools. Jima University MA thesis.

Feyisa. F (2007). Approaches to educational supervision.training Manuscript, Oromia

REB: Finfine.

Fikadu (2003) Supervisor practices of problems in selected primary schools of Awasa

Wereda (Senior Essay) AAU.

Getachew Gezahegn. (2001). School-based instructional supervision in selected secondary

Schools of Addis Ababa. Masters of Arts‟ thesis, at Addis Ababa.

Hailesilasse Fassha. (2002, 2004). “The status of professional development program for
secondary school teachers’’ in Addis Ababa city administration A.A.U
MA thesis.

Kasahun Meriga.(2014). Practices and Challenges of Instructional Supervision in

government Preparatory Schools: in Addis Ababa city administration.
A.A.U MA thesis.

Kutsyuruba, B. (2003). Instructional Supervision: Perceptions of Canadian and Ukrainian

beginning high-school teachers (Master’s Thesis, University of
Saskatchewan).[Online] Retrieved

MOE. (1994). “The new education and training policy”. Policy Document of the Ethiopia
Ministry of Education. Addis Ababa University.

MOE. (2002). Educational supervision manual. Addis Ababa.

MoE.(2007). National Strategy for Teacher Education and Development Lilongwe:

Government Printers.

103
MOE. (2006). Decentralized Management of Education: A Reference Manual, God
Printing and Packing Program, Addis Ababa.

MoE. (2004). Continuous professional development CPD program.

MoE. (2005). Education Sector Development program III (ESDP): Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.

MoE. (2007) . Blue print of M.O.E Adiss Abeba

MoE (2009). Continuous Professional Development for Primary and Secondary School
Teachers, Leaders and Supervisors in Ethiopia: The Framework
Ministry of Education, Ethiopia.

MOE (2010). Education sector Development program (ESDP – Iv). Addis Ababa

Netsanet Kasahun.(2014). Practices and Challenges of Educational Supervision on

professional development in government Preparatory Schools: in Addis
Ababa city administration A.A.U MA thesis.

Yalew Endaweke Mulu. (1998). Fundamental principles of research and its

implementation. Bahir Dar: Alpha printing enterprise.

104
 Appendices

Appendix - A

Addis Ababa University, School of Graduate Studies

College of Education and Behavioral Studies

Department of Educational Planning and Management

Questionnaire to be filled by Teachers and Principals

Objectives of the questionnaires:

The main objective of the questionnaire is to collect data on the current practices and
problems of instructional supervision in secondary schools of Yeka Sub City Administration.
The result could assist to make further improvement in the instruction. Thus, your direct
participation in filling the questionnaire is essential. So, you are kindly requested to provide
information needed objectively and honestly. It is assured that the collected data will be kept
confidential and used for research purpose only.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation!

Directions:

1. Don’t write your name.

2. After reading the questionnaire, tick the appropriate item/s corresponding to your answer.

3. For the questions having no alternative response, you are requested to give a short and
precise response in the space provided.

Part One: Respondents’ Background Information

1.1 Woreda__________School _____________________________1.2 Sex: M  F. 

1.3 Year of service:  1-5  6-10 11-15 16-20 21 and above
1.4 Educational Qualification: Certificate  Diploma  First degree Second degree and
above
1.5 Field of study: Major_____________________ Minor ____________________
1.6 Current position or occupation: _______________________________
1
Part Two: Roles and Practices of Supervision in Promoting Instructional, Curriculum
and Staff development.

Direction I: You are kindly requested to answer the following items that reflect the level in
which the supervisory practice sufficiently corresponds to the expected standards of
supervision by putting ’’√’’ mark under your appropriate response in the column provided
below.

VH= Very High A= Average

H=High L= Low VL= very Low

No Items Scale
1 Instructional Development
VH H A L VL
The level to which instructional supervisors:
5 4 3 2 1
1.1 Help teachers in formulating appropriate
instructional objectives to develop lesson plan.
1.2 Help teachers to set up simple experimental class
room and evaluation for improvement.
1.3 Help teachers develop skills of applying different
assessment and measurement techniques through
organizing in-service training.
1.4 Assist teachers in identifying locally available
teaching and learning resources.
1.5 Provide immediate feedback to teachers
particularly after lesson observation.
1.6 Help teachers in identifying instructional
problems.
1.7 Help to organize meetings for teachers to solve
common instructional problems.

2
No Items Scale
2 Curriculum Development VH H A L VL
The level to which instructional supervisors:
5 4 3 2 1
2.1 Helping teachers in the implementation of the
new curriculum.
2.2 Help to evaluate the existing curriculum and text
book so as to take immediate corrective measure
and provide feedback to the curriculum
specialists.
2.3 Help to identifying the problems in implementing
the existing curriculum as per the education
policy to improve curriculum
2.4 Collecting and providing necessary educational
material that is suppurating to the existing
curriculum.
2.5 Help to integrate the existing curriculum with the
co-curricular activities.
3 Staff Development
The level to which Instructional supervisors:
3.1 Giving the latest information on the teaching
learning strategies that enhance teachers’
profession.
3.2 Assist teachers to conduct action research.
3.3 Helps teachers to share best practices from
different schools.
3.4 Providing an induction program for new teachers.
3.5 Providing short-term training at school level.

3
Direction II: In this section you are kindly requested to give focused /short response to
the following questions.

1. What is the role you have been playing in promoting instructional development?
__________________________________________________________________
2. What are the major teacher supporting activities in which you are engaged in the
school?

_____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

3. How often do school-based supervisors conduct classroom observation?

_____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Part Three: Procedures of supervision for classroom observation

Direction: III. Below are some statements pertaining to procedures of supervision for class
room observation. So, you are kindly requested to respond to the practices of class room
supervision and mark ’’√’’ under your preferred response number in the column provided
below .Choose from the following rating scales.

A= Always S= Sometimes M= Mostly

R= Rarely N= Never

4
No Items Scale
1 Before conducting classroom observation /Pre-
observation conference: A M S R N
The extent to which instructional supervisors: 5 4 3 2 1
1.1 Conducting pre-observation Conference
1.2 Supervisors analyze the lesson plan of the supervisee
teacher before classroom visit.
1.3 Making agreement with teachers on the objectives
and methods of presentation
2 During classroom Observation
The extent to which instructional supervisor:
2.1 Taking sufficient time for observing the teachers
teaching behavior during classroom observation
according to the
Pre-conference discussion.
2.2 Record important data on the teaching learning
process and how the teacher and students are
performing.
2.3 Use the agreed upon procedures to collect the
relevant data pertaining the instructional process.
3 After classroom observation/post- observation
conference:
The extent to which instructional supervisor
3.1 Conducting post-observation conference.
3.2 Analyze the recorded data in terms of established
objectives.
3.3 Discuss with the supervisee teacher on the data
collected during the classroom observation

5
Part Four: Direction IV: Rate the following items in the following table and mark ’’√’’
against each item.

SA= Strongly Agree UD= Undecided A= Agree

D=Disagree SD= Strongly Disagree

No Items Scale
1 Collegial Supervision SA A UD D SD
The extent to which instructional supervisors: 5 4 3 2 1
1.1 Assist teachers to develop the spirit of collegiality.
1.2 Encourage teachers to work cooperatively towards
their professional growth.
1.3 Encourage teachers to work on the improvement of
curriculum cooperatively at school level.
2 Self-directed supervision
The extent to which instructional supervisors:
2.1 Encourage effective teachers to plan their own and
evaluate it by themselves.
2.2 Encourage teachers for their own self professional
improvement.
2.3 Motivating teachers to keep-up their moral by
promoting sense of responsibility.
3 Inquiry-based supervision
The extent to which instructional supervisors:
3.1 Show teachers the procedure how to conduct action
research in school context.
3.2 Encourage teachers to conduct action research to
solve the problem of their school.
3.3 Provide suitable incentive to those who conduct
action research to solve the problem of their school
effectively.

6
No Items Scale
4 Informal supervision SA A UD D SD
The extent to which instructional supervisors: 5 4 3 2 1
4.1 Are open to discuss with individual teachers about
the problem of the school informally.
4.2 Take in to regard the information he/she obtain
from teachers informally as it necessity for decision
making to modify teaching programs.

What organizational structure and condition exist for facilitating the practices of instructional
supervision?

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

7
Part Five: Perception about Supervisory Practice in the School.

Direction V: Indicate the level of your agreement/disagreement/ indecision by putting a

’’√’’ marking the box corresponding to your choice as regards your views on of
supervisory services in your school.

SA= Strongly Agree UD= Undecided A= Agree

D=Disagree SD= Strongly Disagree

No Items Scale
SA A UD D SD
Perception of supervision
5 4 3 2 1

1 Supervision of teachers improves the quality of

teaching and learning.

2 Supervision focuses only on weak points of

teachers.

3 Supervisors are receptive to new ideas from

teachers.

4 Supervision is a means for controlling teachers.

5 Supervisors focus on administrative matters.

6 Any educational officers can be a supervisor.

12. If teachers are not teaching properly and students are not learning properly as expected,
do you think this is related to lack of support by supervisors?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. What do you think should be done to improve supervisory practices, reduce their
challenges and raise their contribution to teacher professional development?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8
Part Six: Major Challenges related to Supervision Practices

Direction: VI. Rate the following items in the following table and mark ’’√’’ against
each item.

VH= Very high A= Average H=High

L= Low VL= Very low
No Items Scale
1 Problems related the Level to support: VH H A L VL
5 4 3 2 1
1.1 Educational supervisors use information for
supporting teachers rather than considering as fault
finding.
1.2 Supervisors are incompetent enough to help other
teachers.
1.3 There is lack of follow up the activities of teachers by the
supervisors.
2 Problems related to working environment
2.1 Lack of available transport facilities.
2.2 Shortage of school finance to support supervisor
practice.
2.3 Inadequate number of supervisors to assist teachers
properly.
2.4 Lack of relevant supervision manual in the school
3 Problems that arise from supervisors:
3.1 Instructional Supervisors lack skill in applying
techniques of supervision.
3.2 Supervisors use of less participative approach.
3.3 Lack of adequate educational experiences on the part
of supervisors.

9
4. If there are other challenges for currently supervisory activities in your school, mention
them.

_____________________________________________________________________
___
5. What solution do you suggest to improve the school –based supervision?

_____________________________________________________________________
___

Thank you!

10
 Appendix - B

Addis Ababa University, School of Graduate studies

College of Education and Behavioral studies

Department of educational planning and management

Guides to interview conducted with supervisors

Dear respondent,

This interview is part of the study design to collection relevant data about the topic “Current
Practices and Challenges of Educational Supervision in governments’ Secondary Schools of
Yeka Sub City; City Administration of Addis Ababa”. So your responses for all parts of the
directions would be kept confidential.

Direction I: General information and personal data

1. Sex ____2. Age ____ 3. Qualification_____4. Experience as a principal ____as a vice

principal ____and as a supervisor ____.

Direction II: Give your response to the questions in short and make it precise.

1. How do you describe the current performance of supervisors pertaining to instructional,

curriculum and staff development activities?
2. What procedures does your school use for classroom observation?
3. To what extent do teachers perceive supervisors as a resource- person or information
person regarding to provision of supervisory services?
4. What are the challenge affecting supervision services? What should be done to alleviate
these challenges?

Thank you!

1
 Appendix-C

Addis Ababa University, School of Graduate studies

College of Education and Behavioral studies

Department of educational planning and management

Guides to interview conducted with Yeka Sub City Education office Teachers’ and
School Leaders’ Development Process Experts.

Direction I: General information and personal data

1. Sex ____ 2. Age ____ 3. Qualification_____

Direction II: Give your response to the questions in short and make it precise.

1. Does School supervisors have supervision schedule?

2. How could supervisors identify typical focused on teachers? Do you have check lists and
Minutes to follow them?

3. Do supervisors have working manual and preparing training? Do you have organized
documents?

4. Does supervisors and schools principals are organized meeting schedule?

5. Do supervisors voluntary participate in the overall school activity?

Thank you!