Student Teacher Field Supervisors Articulate Their Roles

• In Event: Behind Closed Doors: Student Teaching, Supervision, and Curricular Goals

Abstract

Objectives or Purposes: University faculty field supervisors are a critical link in the education, growth, and development of STs, yet their training and roles represent a myriad of experience and pedagogical practices. Many of their tasks are implicit or not clearly defined. We surveyed 24 Central Washington University (CWU) field supervisors to ascertain: 1) how supervisors interpret their roles and enact their responsibilities; 2) how supervisors understand and align their practices with program mandates; and, 3) how supervisors assess and evaluate their own performance. The data collected contributes to improving the Teacher Preparation Program (TPP) design and alignment, and provide valuable insight into determining an effective supervision model.

Perspectives/Theoretical Framework: The literature suggests two cogent areas of research: teacher preparation and candidate supervision. Teacher preparation literature suggests we prepare teachers with knowledge, skill and professional identity development addressing best practice, and organize curriculum around a core set of practices (Grossman, Hammernessa, & McDonald, 2009) that address how explicit tacit knowledge is embedded in judgment (Yee Fan Tang, 2008). Expertise does not happen by chance; it requires deliberate practice (Marzano, 2011), including analysis of situations using theory and research and theoretical and philosophical rationale (Bates and Burbank, 2008).
Research on candidate supervision has found that effective field supervisors develop an empathetic, supportive relationship with STs and offer frequent, immediate, positive specific feedback (Bates & Burbank, 2008; Caires & Almeida, 2007; Scheeler, 2008). To develop reflective practitioners, supervisors integrate meta-cognition/open-ended questions and increase collaboration among themselves, teachers and principals (Kent & Simpson, 2009; Fernandez & Erbilgin, 2009; Scheeler et al., 2009).

Methods, Techniques, or Modes of Inquiry: CWU graduates about 500 teachers a year in up to 30 different endorsement areas. STs are placed all over the state, and our 24 field supervisors, mainly retired teachers and principals, work out of six University Centers in addition to the main campus. Supervisors were invited to take an anonymous online Qualtrics survey, which had 14 multiple-choice demographic questions and 18 open-ended questions. 17 supervisors (71%) completed the survey. Responses were analyzed for commonalities or themes and categorized into topics.

Results and/or Substantive Conclusions: The majority of supervisors are retired from public schools with a clinical rather than theoretical or research background, and their approach differs from university faculty. Most supervisors see their role as mentor, consultant and facilitator. Most supervisors emphasize candidates’ need for dispositions and skills for classroom survival and improving instructional practice, rather than theoretical constructs which they believe candidates learned in their university courses and need not be strengthened in practice. Their philosophy is based on personal experience rather than current research on best practices. They feel they have been successful if the candidate is successful in student teaching, graduates and is hired.

Significance: The significance of these findings is that they corroborate some of the previous research on field supervision as well as providing suggestions for program improvement and continuity between faculty and supervisors within our university.

Authors

• Jan Byers-Kirsch, Central Washington University

• Naomi Jeffery N.J.P. Petersen, Central Washington University