Clinical supervision - Essay Example

afterwards, in order to analyze it"(Goldhammer 1969) Four years after Goldhammer outlined his model for clinical supervision, Cogan did an analysis of Goldhammer's work and with the assistance of supervisors of teachers at Harvard University, Cogan adopted his own Clinical Supervision model, albeit it has three more steps than the pioneering model, the minor variance in the number of steps does not water down or conflict in concept. Cogan, however, does exhibit some flexibility as he offers, "certain phases may be omitted or altered, or new procedures instituted, depending upon the successful development of the working relationship between the supervisor and the teacher"(Cogan 1973 10-12).

The fact that an allowance is kept alive for the possible retrofitting of a model, is an extremely salient point; because one might not always be successful in keeping the practice and theory diversities at a minimum, therefore adjustment might be necessary in both the model and its presentation. A third model was designed by Acheson & Gall (1987), this model possesses only three steps; planning conference; observation and feedback conference. The Peer Assistance and Review states that, "The clinical Supervision concept is intended to be a cyclic process.

This implies that the supervision process is not a one time "drop in" event, but rather, the teacher and the supervisor will work together through a series of cycles to enhance the teachers abilities"(PAR) Anderson & Krajewsk i(1993 pp 175-176), are working on a similar flexible plane as Cogan as they maintain, "teachers are not compelled to follow a sequential order, "they can cut them to suit the situations in which they find. Goldhammer (1969) defines the term ‘clinical’ as, “it is meant to imply supervision up close” That is the supervisor actually observes the teacher in the classroom, collects data on the observation, and uses the data for analysis following the observation”Goldhammer believed that the supervisory process is prime to embody an aire of open communication and trust between the teacher and his/her consulting teacher.

The most basic element in the process is how the teacher feels about their personal level of capabilities. There has been an evolutionary explosion in the area of Clinical supervision in the past ten years. We have come to see the practice of development of cognitive coaching, peer coaching, and action research. Either one of these three processes can work in accord with either of the three clinical supervision models mention herein. If either of the processes is applied individually, as in the case of cognitive coaching; wherein Costa and Garmston (1994) , describes as, “a non-judgmental set of practices built around a planning conference, lesson observation, and a reflective follow-up conference”(Costa & Garmston).

These processes breakdown a group of basic assumptions, guidelines, and skills which can work in all contact with other teachers, learners, and the parents. It follows, that when all three of these processes are super imposed over the various steps of either of the three models mentioned, it is a given that we are then reckoning with a major positive shift in the learning environment.