Mettu University College of Education and

Behavioral Science Department of Educational

Leadership and Management
Course title: Instructional Supervision: EdLM----

Theories of Supervision;
According to Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (1993).

Prepared by:
Fikru Terfa Geleta ID № RM0039/13
Melese Tamene ID № RM0040/13
Abdulrazak Yusuf ID № RM0036. /2013
Summited to:
Wubayehu Dagne. (Ass. Prof.)

June, 2021
Mettu University
Table of Contents

Theories of supervision....................................................................................................................2

1
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2

A Framework for Supervision.........................................................................................................3

1. Scientific Management Supervision Theory............................................................................4

2. Human relations theory............................................................................................................5

3. Neo scientific management......................................................................................................6

4. Human Resources Supervision.................................................................................................6

Comparison of Human Relations and Human Resources Supervision...........................................7

5. The normative/cultural.............................................................................................................7

Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................7

References........................................................................................................................................8

2
Theories of supervision.
Introduction
The failure of students to learn in any given classroom is considered the failure of the
teacher to find a way to enable the students to learn [CITATION Ser07 \p 4 \l 1033 ].” Policy
mandates are pressuring schools to improve academic achievement. Teachers and teaching
take the brunt of the blame. Consequently, teaching and supervision must be redefined in
order to keep up with the political and societal pressures and demands. The focus becomes
student learning. “…unless teachers become sufficiently self-managing by accepting more
responsibility for their own learning and development, the capacity of the school to
provide needed help will be severely taxed [CITATION Ser07 \p 5 \l 1033 ].” Supervision is not
done to or for teachers; it should be done with teachers.

Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2007) in Sergiovanni & Starratt Redefinition of

Supervision define supervision as: “…engaging in such functions as observing teaching
and providing helpful comments, helping teachers to reflect on their practice, teaching a
demonstration lesson, suggesting items teachers might include in their portfolios,
disaggregating test score data, and conducting formal evaluations of teaching as required
by district or state policy [CITATION Ser07 \p 5 \l 1033 ].”

The authors believe that teachers can also serve as supervisors. Teachers who serve in this
role carry out the following functions. “Teachers, for example, engage in supervisory
functions when they visit each other’s classes to learn and to provide help, to critique each
other’s planning, to examine together samples of student work, to pour over the most
recent test scores together, to puzzle together over whether assignments they are giving
students are appropriate or whether student performance levels meet important standards,
to share portfolios and to engage in other activities that increase their learning, the
learning of their colleagues, and the quality of teaching and learning that students receive
[CITATION Ser07 \p 5 \l 1033 ].”

“Communities of practice are formed as teachers come together in a common effort to help
each other teach and learn, to care for each other, and to work together in advancing

3
student academic achievement (p. 5).” A culture of supervision could occur in a
community of practice.

“But bringing together leadership and learning does not work well in promoting effective
teaching and learning for students when the focus is only on meeting the learning needs
and interests of teachers one at a time. This one-at-a-time approach is a great way to help
teachers get smarter. But smart teachers and smart schools are not the same. A school gets
smarter when what teachers learn and what teachers do are aligned with the school’s
purposes. A school gets smarter when the school itself is the prime beneficiary of learning
that counts the most in a school is learning that supports the public good. Here the authors
define supervision as professional development, leadership, administration. Supervisors
take on many roles. “Among them are colleague, teacher developer, keeper of the vision,
and designed of learning opportunities. They will be able to maintain, as well, a healthy
concern for quality control as they strive to push the learning curves of teachers and
schools to the limit as they function as stewards on behalf of parents and students
[ CITATION Ser07 \l 1033 ].

Sergiovanni & Starratt (1993) see supervision as a focal point that intent to improve teacher’s
knowledge, skills, and abilities to make informal decisions and solve problem effectively.

A Framework for Supervision

.…the purpose of supervision is to help increase the opportunity and the capacity of
schools to contribute more effectively to students’ academic success. …instructional
capacity, instructional quality, and student engagement are listed as the three pathways
that supervisors travel in helping schools become more successful.…we believe that the
heart of supervisory leadership is designing opportunities for teachers to continuously
expand their capacity to learn, to care, to help each other, and to teach more effectively.
We view schools as learning communities where students, teachers, and supervisors alike
are learners and teachers depending upon the circumstances [ CITATION Ser07 \l 1033 ].

Supervision is generally viewed as "both a role and function" [CITATION Placeholder1 \l 1033 ]
filled by administrative staff. However, in the first chapter of their work Supervision: A

4
Redefinition, Sergiovanni & Starratt challenge this view and suggest that supervision should
extend beyond the grasp of school leaders to faculy as well. According to Sergiovanni & Starratt,
doing so will renew the current school supervision environment and manifest itself as a learning
community within the school – for all those participating in school functions. Sergiovanni &
Starratt state that, with the correct framwork, their views of renewal are indeed possible, yet
they agree it is not without its challenges [CITATION Placeholder1 \l 1033 ].

If Sergiovanni & Starratt are correct that the creation of such an environment has demonstrated
the ability to bring about school renewal - produce academic achievement by students, and high
levels of satisfaction and accomplishments by school faculty and leadership- then it makes sense
to implement it no matter the difficulty or cost [CITATION Placeholder1 \m Fre \m Ano11 \l 1033 ]

Sergiovanni & Starratt (2007) stated that supervision should be a norm, not an event. How does a
leader create a climate where supervision is the norm?  In Sergiovanni & Starrett’s (2007)
framework for supervision, they provide three leadership pathways that will help supervisors
improve academic achievement in schools. These three pathways are instructional capacity,
instructional quality, and student engagement. As these three continue to improve, so will student
achievement.

Five theories of supervision and four sources of authority were discussed through a scenario. 
Each of the theories view teachers differently. Five theories of supervision are Scientific
Management Supervision Theory, Human Relation Supervision Theory, Neo-Scientific
Management Supervision Theory, Human Resource Supervision Theory, Normative Supervision
Theory.

The theory identifies and describes three sets of variables. One set, the organizational success
variables, represent the output which results, from school efforts and activities. Another set, the
initiating variables, represents those assumptions, actions, belief patterns, and modes of
operation which are best- described as administrative and organizational. The third set, the
mediating variables, constitute the fabric of the human organization of any school.
The theory suggests that working to affect change in the mediating variables (which include
such variables as teachers1 attitudes, levels of job satisfaction, commitment to school goals,
levels of performance goals held levels of group loyalty, degree of confidence and trust, sense of

5
power and influence) will in the long run increase the schools' effectiveness.

Sergiovanni and Starratt defined the newer patterns of action by supervisors which attempt to
change the mediating variables as enlightened supervision. They contended that "Enlightened
supervision . . . fully coordinates, develops, and utilizes the resources of the human
organization." They proposed that their concept of enlightened supervision entails: " . . . the
principle of supportive relationships, group methods of supervision, Theory Y assumptions, self-
control methods, ability authority, and so on." They added that "The enlightened supervisor
works for his own extinction."

6
 1. Scientific Management Supervision Theory
Knowledge of teaching transformed successfully from administrators to teachers. In the
twentieth century, school administrators consist of principals, assistant superintendents,
curriculum coordinators, and consultants shared the responsibility of supervision and evaluation.
During this time, the scientific management theory which consists of inspection, domination and
quality control influenced supervision and evaluation[CITATION Kaz16 \l 1033 ].

Characterized by Accountability, Control, Efficiency. Requires “workers” who do not

think or contribute but rather simply follow orders blindly

Method are:

 Identify the best way.

 Develop a work system based on this ‘research.’

 Communicate expectations to workers.

 Train workers in the system.

 Monitor and evaluate in order to ensure compliance.

Scientific management ideas carry over to school supervision when teachers are viewed as
implementers of highly refined curriculum and teaching systems and where close
supervision is practiced to ensure that they are teaching the way they are supposed to and
that they are carefully following approved guidelines and teaching protocols [ CITATION
Ser07 \l 1033 ].

In the scientific management theory, teachers are viewed as people who implement and
therefore, they must be closely supervised to ensure that they are implementing the curriculum or
teaching system properly.

7
 2. Human relations theory
The productivity of workers could be increased by meeting their social needs at work,
providing them with opportunities to interact with each other, treating them decently, and
involving them in the decision-making process [CITATION Ser07 \p 15-16 \l 1033 ].

When it was applied to schooling, teachers were viewed as whole persons in their own
right rather than as packages of needed energy, skills, and aptitudes to be used by
administrators and supervisors. Supervisors needed to work to create a feeling of
satisfaction among teachers by showing interest in them as people. The movement actually
resulted in widespread neglect of teachers. Participatory supervision became permissive
supervision, which in practice was laissez-faire supervision. The human relations view
teachers as a voice to be considered before implementation[CITATION Placeholder1 \p 16 \l 1033 ].

3. Neo scientific management

Neo-scientific management shares with traditional management an interest in control,
accountability, and efficiency, but the means by which it achieves these ends is far more
impersonal [CITATION Placeholder1 \p 16 \l 1033 ].

A more impersonal way to control what it is that teachers do is to introduce standardized

criterion-referenced testing and to make public the scores by class and school. Since it is
accepted that what gets measured gets taught, tests serve as an impersonal method of
controlling the teacher’s work (in neo-scientific management) [ CITATION Ser07 \l 1033 ].

4. Human Resources Supervision

Human resources represent a higher regard for human need, potential, and satisfaction.
Leadership within this new kind of supervision was to be neither directive nor patronizing,
but instead, supportive. Sensing negative assumptions and expectations, teachers are likely
to respond in a negative way. This is an example of the self-fulfilling prophecy [ CITATION
Ser07 \l 1033 ].

8
Human resources view teachers as ones who need to be motivated by taking charge of their work
life and being held accountable for sharing goals.

Instead of focusing on creating happy teachers as a means to gain productive cooperation,

the new supervision emphasis is on creating the conditions of successful work as a means
of increasing one’s satisfaction and self-esteem [ CITATION Placeholder1 \l 1033 ].

Comparison of Human Relations and Human Resources

Supervision
Human relations focus on creating the environment for teacher happiness whereas Human
resources focus on end results because achievements result in feelings of accomplishment.

5. The normative/cultural     
The normative/cultural views teachers as a contributing community member.

When considering the four sources of authority it is important to know that a supervisor may
practice a combination of these.   The supervisor relies heavily on specific qualities within each
of these types of authority. The Bureaucratic supervisor relies on hierarchal authority.  The
Personal supervisor relies on motivation and their interpersonal skills to lead. The Professional
supervisor relies on “informed knowledge of the craft of teaching” and teacher expertise
(Sergiovanni & Starrett’s, 2007, pg. 31). The Moral supervisor relies on the teacher’s
commitment to the community.

Conclusion

Sergiovanni & Starratt presented a framework for supervision which promotes a school culture
of collaboration through the means of supervision. This methodology, I believe, presents school
leadership with the opportunity to create change from within, with little resistance. Through the
creation of a collaborative platform for supervision, school leadership is not only sharing the
burden – thus alleviating their work pressure – but, in a sense, through the provision of
confidence, gain schoolwide support, increase faculty overall performance and personal
satisfaction. I feel that employing such an approach will manifest a learning community within

9
the school, which will ultimately gain for all students’ high levels of achievement and
satisfaction.

References

10
Anonymous. (2011, May 24). Turnaround Schools Create Culture of Achievement. Retrieved
from Expeditionary Learning: http://elschools.org/best-practices/turnaround-schools-
create-culture-achievement

Kazi Hoque et.al. (2016). Educational supervision and development. Munich: GRIN Verlag,
https://www.grin.com/document/321868.

Lunenberg, F. C., & Ornstein, A. C. (2012). Educational Administration Concepts & Practices .
Belmont: Wadsworth.

Sergiovanni T. J. & Starratt R. J. (2007). Supervision: A Redefinition 8th Ed. New York:
McGraw Hill.

11