Alternative Approaches in Educational Supervision

Yıl 2011, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 33, 67 - 78, 10.10.2013

Yüksel Gündüz , Aydın Balyer

Öz

The main purpose of this study is to introduce alternative approaches in educational supervision. In this study; cognitive coaching, mentorship, peer supervision, portfolio evaluation, peer evaluation and action research are introduced as alternative supervision approaches and also it is aimed to make it clear what these approaches are, their benefits in supervising process and how they are used in practice different from traditional methods. It has been understood by this study that comparing to traditional approaches, alternative approaches are essential for supervisory process as they help teachers to understand themselves better, be aware of their self-efficacy, improve themselves in their work fields, have the sense of satisfaction with their work, share experiences on classroom practices, voice themselves comfortably, participate decisions, use personal autonomy and most importantly do their work meaningfully. In this process, it has been found out that it is necessary to create a supportive school setting, also to form the staff into reflective groups at school, urge team work and peer cooperation. Furthermore, with these new supervision approaches, negative perceptions of supervisory process are eliminated and supervisor’s role changes into counseling as it should be indeed.

Key words: Peer supervision, cognitive coaching, mentorship, peer consultation, portfolio development, action research

Anahtar Kelimeler

-

Eğitim Denetiminde Alternatif Yaklaşımlar Alternative Approaches in Educational Supervision

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, eğitim denetiminde alternatif (çağdaş) yaklaşımların neler olduğunu ortaya koymaktır. Çalışmada, alternatif denetim yaklaşımları olarak, bilişsel koçluk, mentorlük, meslektaş yardımı, portföy değerlendirmesi, meslektaş değerlendirmesi ve aksiyon araştırması ele alınmış ve bunların ne olduğu, yararları ve uygulama biçimleri ortaya konmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Meslektaş yardımlaşması, bilişsel koçluk, mentorlük, portföy değerlendirmesi, meslektaş değerlendirmesi, aksiyon araştırması

Kaynakça

• Alfonso, R.J. (1977). Will peer supervision work? Educational Leadership, May, 594-601. Benshoff, M. J. & Paisley, P. (2001). The structured peer consultation model for school counselors. Journal of Counseling & Development, January/February, 74, 314318.
• Benshoff, M. J. (2001). Peer consultation as a form of supervision. Reading for Child and Youth Care Workers, 15, 1-5.
• Blumberg, A. (1986). Supervisor and teachers: A private cold war. California: Mr Cutrhan Publishing, Costa, L.A & Kallick B. (2000). Getting into the habit of reflection. Educational Leadership, 57(7), 60–62.
• Davis G A, & Thomas M. A. (1989), Effective schools and effective teacher. Allyn and Bacon, Massachusetts.
• Garmston, R., Linder, C. & Whitaker, J. (1993). Reflections on cognitive coaching. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 57-60.
• Glanz, J., (2005). Action research as instructional supervision: Suggestions for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 89(643), 17-27.
• Harland, T. (2005). Developing a portfolio: To promote authentic enquiry in teacher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(3), 327-337.
• Hawkins, P. & Sohohet, R. (2006). Supervision in the helping professions. Open University Pres, Third Edition, England.
• Manathunga, C. (2007). Supervision as mentoring: The role of power and boundary crossing. Studies In Continuing Education, 29(2), 207-221.
• McFaul, A. S. & Cooper, M.J. (1984). Peer clinical supervision: Theory vs. reality. Educational Leadership, April, 4-9.
• McNicoll, A. (2008) Peer supervision -no-one knows as much as all of us. Coaching and Mentoring Center, New Zealand, 1- 4.
• Moore, K.B. (2001). Mentoring and coaching teachers. Early Childhood Today, 16(3), 2-15.
• Peterson, D.P. (1995). Teacher evaluation. California: Carvin Press Sage Publishing, Scheal, P. (1992). The staff development handbook. London: Kogan Page Ltd.
• Senge, P. (2006). The fifth discipline-the art and practice of the learning organisation. Doubleday, N. York.
• Single, P.B. & Single, M.R. (2005). E-mentoring for social equity: Review of research to inform program development. Mentoring and Tutoring, 13 (2), 301-320.
• Sullivan, S. & J. Glanz. (1999). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. Corwin Press.
• Treslan, L.D. (2008). Educational supervision in a transformed school organisation. Memorial University of Newfoundland, 1-8.
• White, D. (2006). Cognitive coaching when used alongside proven management techniques can increase in technical organisations. Jossey Bass, 1-6.
• Zepeda, J. S. (2002). Linking portfolio development to clinical supervision: A case study. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 83-102.