Supervision of Instruction - The History of Supervision, Roles and Responsibilities of Supervisors, Issues Trends and Controversies Supervision, as a field

of educational practice with clearly delineated roles and responsibilities, did not fall from the sky fully formed. Rather, supervision emerged slowly as a distinct practice, always in relation to the institutional, academic, cultural, and professional dynamics that have historically generated the complex agenda of schooling. The History of Supervision In colonial New England, supervision of instruction began as a process of external inspection: one or more local citizens were appointed to inspect both what the teachers were teaching and what the students were learning. The inspection theme was to remain firmly embedded in the practice of supervision. The history of supervision as a formal activity exercised by educational administrators within a system of schools did not begin until the formation of the common school in the late 1830s. During the first half of the nineteenth century, population growth in the major cities of the United States necessitated the formation of city school systems. While superintendents initially inspected schools to see that teachers were following the prescribed curriculum and that students were able to recite their lessons, the multiplication of schools soon made this an impossible task for superintendents and the job was delegated to the school principal. In the early decades of the twentieth century, the movement toward scientific management in both industrial and public administration had an influence on schools. At much the same time, child-centered and experienced-based curriculum theories of European educators such as Friedrich Froebel, Johann Pestalozzi, and Johann Herbart, as well as the prominent American philosopher John Dewey, were also affecting the schools. Thus, school supervisors often found themselves caught between the demand to evaluate teachers scientifically and the simultaneous need to transform teaching from a mechanistic repetition of teaching protocols to a diverse repertory of instructional responses to students' natural curiosity and diverse levels of readiness. This tension between supervision as a uniform, scientific approach to teaching and supervision as a flexible, dialogic process between teacher and supervisor involving the shared, professional discretion of both was to continue throughout the century. In the second half of the century the field of supervision became closely identified with various forms of clinical supervision. Initially developed by Harvard professors Morris Cogan and Robert Anderson and their graduate students, many of whom subsequently became professors of supervision in other universities, clinical supervision blended elements of "objective" and "scientific" classroom observation with aspects of collegial coaching, rational planning, and a flexible, inquiry-based concern with student learning. In 1969 Robert Goldhammer proposed the following five-stage process in clinical supervision: (1) a pre-observation conference between supervisor and teacher concerning elements of the lesson to be observed; (2) classroom observation; (3) a supervisor's analysis of notes from the observation, and planning for the post-observation conference;(4) a post-observation conference between supervisor and teacher; and (5) a supervisor's analysis of the post-observation conference. For many practitioners, these stages were reduced to three: the pre-observation conference, the observation, and the post-observation conference. Cogan insisted on a collegial relationship focused on the teacher's interest in improving student learning, and on a nonjudgmental observation and inquiry process. The initial practice of clinical supervision, however, soon had to accommodate perspectives coming out of the postSputnik curriculum reforms of the 1960s that focused on the structures of the academic disciplines. Shortly thereafter, perspectives generated by research on effective schools and effective classrooms that purported to have discovered the basic steps to effective teaching colonized the clinical supervision process. It was during this period that noted educator Madeline Hunter adapted research findings from the psychology of learning and introduced what was also to become a very popular, quasi-scientific approach to effective teaching in the 1970s and 1980s. These various understandings of curriculum and teaching were frequently superimposed on the three-to five-stage process of clinical supervision and became normative for supervisors' work with teachers. Nevertheless, in many academic circles the original dialogic and reflective process of Cogan and Goldhammer continued as the preferred process of supervision. This original process of supervision has been subsequently embraced by advocates of peer supervision and collegialteacher leadership through action research in classrooms. Despite the obvious appeal of clinical supervision in its various forms, it is time-consuming and labor-intensive, rendering it impossible to use on any regular basis given the large number of teachers that supervisors are expected to supervise (in addition to their other administrative responsibilities). Recognizing the time restraints of practicing supervisors, and wanting to honor the need to promote the growth of teachers, Thomas Sergiovanni and Robert Starratt suggested, in 1998, the creation of a supervisory system with multiple processes of supervision, including summative evaluation. Such a system would not require the direct involvement of a formal supervisor for every teacher every year. The supervisory system might cycle teachers with professional status through a three-to five-year period, during which they would receive a formal evaluation once and a variety of other evaluative processes during the other years (e.g., self-evaluation, peer supervision, curriculum development, action research on new teaching strategies, involvement in a school renewal project). The once-a-cycle formal evaluation would require evidence of professional growth. Sergiovanni and Starratt also attempted to open the work of supervision to intentional involvement with the schoolwide renewal agenda, thus placing all stimuli toward professional growthincluding the supervisory systemwithin that larger context. Roles and Responsibilities of Supervisors Since supervision is an activity that is part of so many different roles, a few distinctions are in order. First, there are university-based supervisors of undergraduate students in teacher education programs who supervise the activities of novice teachers. Next, a principal or assistant principal may be said to conduct general supervisionas distinct from the more specific, subject-matter supervision conducted by a high school department chair. Other professional personnel involved in supervisory roles include cluster coordinators, lead teachers, mentors, peer coaches and peer supervisors, curriculum specialists, project directors, trainers, program evaluators, and district office administrators. Unfortunately, these professionals, more often than not, carry on their supervisory work without having any professional preparation for it, finding by trial and error what seems to work for them. Principals not only supervise teachers, but also monitor the work of counselors, librarians, health personnel, secretaries, custodians, bus drivers, and other staff who work in or around the school. This work requires as much diplomacy, sensitivity, and humanity as the supervision of teachers, although it tends to be neglected entirely in the literature. In their everyday contact with students, all of these support personnel may teach multiple, important lessons about the integrity of various kinds of work, about civility and etiquette, and about basic social behavior.

Principals and assistant principals also supervise the work and the behavior of students in the school. As the relationships between students become more governed by legal restrictionsincluding definitions of racial, ethnic, and sexual harassment, of due process, of privacy and free speech rightsand as the incidents of physical violence, bullying, carrying of weapons to school, and the extreme cases of students killing other students increase, this aspect of supervision becomes increasingly complex. Many system and local school administrators have developed a comprehensive system of low visibility, and restrained, security-oriented supervision that anticipates various responses to inappropriate behavior. Unfortunately, many have not attended to the corresponding need to build a nurturing system of pastoral supervision that sets guidelines for the adults in the school in order for them to build sensitive relationships of trust, care, support, and compassion with the students. This more pastoral approach to student supervision will lessen, though not eliminate, the need for other security-conscious types of supervision. Supervisors usually wear two or three other hats, but their specific responsibilities tend to include some or all of the following arranged in ascending order of scope or reach: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Mentoring or providing for mentoring of beginning teachers to facilitate a supportive induction into the profession. Bringing individual teachers up to minimum standards of effective teaching (quality assurance and maintenance functions of supervision). Improving individual teachers' competencies, no matter how proficient they are deemed to be. Working with groups of teachers in a collaborative effort to improve student learning. Working with groups of teachers to adapt the local curriculum to the needs and abilities of diverse groups of students, while at the same time bringing the local curriculum in line with state and national standards. Relating teachers' efforts to improve their teaching to the larger goals of schoolwide improvement in the service of quality learning for all children.

With the involvement of state departments of education in monitoring school improvement efforts, supervisory responsibilities have increasingly encompassed the tasks at the higher end of this list. In turn, these responsibilities involve supervisors in much more complex, collaborative, and develop-mental efforts with teachers, rather than with the more strictly inspectorial responsibilities of an earlier time. Issues Trends and Controversies A variety of trends can be seen in the field of supervision, all of which mutually influence one another (both positively and negatively) in a dynamic school environment. One trend indicates that teachers will be "supervised" by test results. With teachers being held accountable for increasing their students' scores, the results of these tests are being scrutinized by district and in-house administrators and judgments being made about the competency of individual teachersand, in the case of consistently lowperforming schools, about all the teachers in the school. In some districts, these judgments have led to serious efforts at professional development. Unfortunately, in many districts test results have led to an almost vitriolic public blaming of teachers. Another trend has been toward a significant involvement of teachers in peer supervision and program development. In the literature, these developments are often included in the larger theme of teacher leadership. Along with this trend comes an increasing differentiation in the available options by which teacher supervision may be conducted, thus leaving the more formal assessment for experienced teachers to once every four or five years. Whatever form supervision takes, it has been substantially influenced by the focus on student learning (and on the test performances that demonstrate this learning), and by the need to make sure that attention is given to the learning of all students. Thus, the supervisory episode tends to focus more on an analysis of teaching activity only in relation to, rather than independent of, evidence of student learning. This focus on student learning in supervision is further influenced by the trend to highlight the learning of previously underserved students, namely those with special needs and consistently low-performing students. Supervisors and teachers are expected to take responsibility for high quality learning for all students, a responsibility that necessarily changes how they approach their work together. Finally, all of these trends are combined in the large trend of focusing on schoolwide renewal. This means attending not only to instructional and curriculum issues, but also to structural and cultural issues that impede student learning. There are a variety of issues in the field of supervision that need resolutionor at least significant attention. To confront the large agenda of school renewal (in which schools are required to respond to state-imposed curriculum standards or guidelines), systems of supervision at the state level, the district level, and the school level need to coordinate goals and priorities. The politics of school renewal tend to lend a punitive, judgmental edge to supervision at the state level, and to some degree at the district level, and that impression poisons supervision at the school level. Test-driven accountability policies, and the one-dimensional rhetoric with which they are expressed, need to take into account the extraordinarily complex realities of classrooms and neighborhood communities, as well as the traditionally underresourced support systems that are needed to develop the in-school capacity to carry out the renewal agenda. If state and district policies call for quality learning for all students, then schools have to provide adequate opportunities for all students to learn the curriculum on which they will be tested. Supervisors are caught in a crossfire. On the one hand, parents and teachers complain that a variety of enriched learning opportunities for children who have not had an opportunity to learn the curriculum are not available; on the other, district and state administrators complain about poor achievement scores on high-stakes tests, while ignoring the resources needed to bring the schools into compliance with reform policies. Another issue needing attention is the divide between those supervisors who accept a functionalist, decontextualized, and oversimplified realist view of knowledge as something to be delivered, and those who approach knowledge as something to be actively constructed and performed by learners in realistic contextsand as something whose integrity implies a moral as well as a cognitive appropriation. Assumptions about the nature of knowledge and its appropriation, often unspoken, substantially affect how supervisors and teachers approach student learning and teaching protocols. This is an issue about which all players in the drama of schooling will only gradually reach some kind of consensus. A related issue concerns the degree to which schools and classrooms will accommodate cultural, class, gender, racial, and intellectual diversity. Supervisors cannot ignore the implications of these necessary accommodations for the work of teaching and curriculum development. Perhaps the biggest controversy in the field is whether supervision as a field of professional and academic inquiry and of relatively unified normative principles will continue to exist as a discernable field. More than a few scholars and practitioners have suggested that supervisory roles and responsibilities should be subsumed under various other administrative and professional roles. For example, principals, acting as "instructional leaders," could simply include a concern for quality learning and teaching under the rubric of instructional leadership and eliminate the use of the word supervision from their vocabulary. Similarly, teacher leaders could engage in collegial inquiry or action research focused on improving student learning and teaching strategies, and similarly eliminate the use of the word supervision from their vocabularyterms likementoring, coaching, professional development, and curriculum development could instead be used.

Many professors whose academic specialization has been devoted to research and publication in the field of supervision oppose this relinquishing of the concept of supervision, not only because of the vitality of its history, but also because of the fact that the legal and bureaucratic requirements for supervision will surely remain in place. Having a discernible, professional field of supervision, they contend, will prevent the bureaucratic and legal practice of supervision from becoming a formalistic, evaluative ritual. Keeping the professional growth and development aspect of supervision in dynamic tension with the evaluative side of supervision can best be served, they maintain, by retaining a discernible and robust field of scholarship that attends to this balance. These trends, issues, and controversies will likely keep the field of supervision in a state of dynamic development. However, a lack of attention to the implications of these issues will most certainly cause the field to atrophy and drift to the irrelevant fringes of the schooling enterprise. Chapter 3 SUPERVISION OF INSTRUCTION Cheryl F. Fischer Through the effective supervision of instruction, administrators can reinforce and enhance teaching practices that will contribute to improved student learning. By skillfully analyzing performance and appropriate data, administrators can provide meaningful feedback and direction to teachers that can have a profound effect on the learning that occurs in each classroom. Because student learning is the primary function of the schools, the effective supervision of instruction is one of the most critical functions of the administrator. If schools are to provide equal access to quality educational programs for all students, administrators must hold teachers accountable for providing an appropriate and well-planned program. These programs include a variety of teaching strategies designed to meet the diverse needs of all students in our complex society. This chapter reviews areas of focus for teacher evaluation, the components of effective teaching, some basic strategies and procedures for data gathering and conferencing, and steps administrators should consider in the effective preparation of conference memorandums and letters of reprimand. Approaches that are discussed which differ from existing procedures in the district should be used to stimulate discussion and prompt a review of current practices. This process may lead to a restructuring of practices and procedures that could result in the enhancement of student learning. Teacher Evaluation To enhance the professional effectiveness of the teaching staff administrators must be skilled in these areas: (a) what to evaluate, (b) how to observe and analyze classroom observation information and other data, and (c) how to translate the results of observations and the summary of data into meaningful conference feedback that guides and encourages teachers to improve instruction. Expectancies for teacher performance were enacted by California State Senate Bill 813 and are included in Section 44662 of the California Education Code. This section requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study. Under this code, evaluation and assessment of certificated employee competency are required in four areas. These include: (1) the progress of pupils toward the district-adopted standards, (2) the instructional strategies and techniques utilized by the teacher, (3) the teacher's adherence to curricular objectives, and (4) the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment. Although this code section prohibits the evaluation and assessment of certificated employee competence by the use of published norms established by standardized tests, it does give the board of education of each district authority to adopt additional evaluation guidelines and criteria. In addition, the school board in each district is required to establish and define job responsibilities of other certificated non-instructional personnel (supervision or administrative positions) whose responsibilities cannot be evaluated in the aforementioned four areas. The ability to assess teacher competence in California in the four areas outlined in SB 813 is a critical factor in achieving educational excellence and a positive learning experience for all students. In the following sections, methods that can be used to assess the competency of teachers in each of the four areas will be addressed. Assessing Pupil Progress To assess student progress toward the established district standards and to facilitate the planning of various types of instruction, administration should ensure that teachers are utilizing information from a variety of valid and appropriate sources before they begin planning lessons or teaching. This could include data regarding students' backgrounds, academic levels, and interests, as well as other data from student records to ascertain academic needs and to facilitate planning appropriate initial learning. It is important for the administration to note that information regarding students and their families is used by the staff for professional purposes only and is kept confidential as a matter of professional ethics. Administrators should determine if teachers are using the numerous formative and summative diagnostic processes available to assist in planning meaningful instruction. Formative measures include ongoing teacher monitoring of student progress during the lessons, practice sessions, and on daily assignments. Measures administered periodically like criterion-referenced tests, grade level examinations, or placement tests that are teacher-made or part of district-adopted material, also provide helpful information on the status of student learning as instruction progresses. Summative measures like minimum competency examinations, district mastery tests, the California Assessment Program examinations, and standardized tests provide a different perspective from the ongoing formative measures. This type of data enables the teacher to evaluate the long-term retention rate of their students and to compare student learning on a regional, state, or national basis. The administrators should verify that teachers are preparing and maintaining adequate and accurate records of student progress. This will include the regular and systematic recording of meaningful data regarding student progress on specific concepts and skills related to the standards for each subject for the grade level or course they are teaching. Once students' success levels have been identified from the records, the teacher should use the information to plan instruction and any necessary remediation and enrichment. By utilizing ongoing information on achievement, teachers can maintain consistent and challenging expectations for all students. Students and parents should be informed of the students' progress toward achieving district goals and objectives through comments on individual work, progress reports, conferencing, report cards, and other measures. Students should be encouraged to participate in self-assessment as a way of motivating students to improve academic achievement. Instructional Strategies When a profession deals with people, cause-and-effect relationships are never identified as certainties, only as possibilities. Therefore, there are no certainties in teaching. It is a situational process requiring constant decision-making which, when properly

implemented, increases the probability of learning. Research on teacher effectiveness has been intensified in the last two decades. The results have helped identify an instructional process that provides a solid and basic framework for planning instruction which is helpful in guiding the administrator in what to look for when visiting a classroom. These steps include planning, preparing, presenting the lesson, monitoring student progress, and conducting practice sessions. Planning the Lesson Formulating a well-defined objective of the lesson is a critical first step as it provides the direction and framework for the decisions which will follow. The objective should describe the specific content to be learned and the observable behavior the student will exhibit to demonstrate that learning has occurred. No matter how expertly the objectives are stated, objectives facilitate learning only if they are appropriate to the academic achievement of students. A well-written objective includes specific information on what is to be included in the lesson and what is not. This specifically expedites the next step, which is the identification of sub-skills or sub-objectives. A task analysis of each of the sub-objectives enables the teacher to sequence them in order of difficulty to provide a logical sequence to the lesson. Preparing the Lesson Administrators will know if the appropriate planning for instruction has taken place when the teacher is able to design a lesson that achieves the objective. This means everything the teacher and students do during the lesson is related to the objective. Birdwalking is a term coined by Madeline Hunter that refers to the inability of a teacher to focus on the objective of the lesson (Gentile, 1987). Instead, the teacher birdwalks, pecking at interesting ideas with what seems to be worthwhile or informative digressions, distracting the students' thinking processes and leaving the students confused about the topic of the lesson. Avoiding birdwalking does not mean there can never be spontaneity. The decision to adjust a lesson must be a conscious one where the advantage of postponing or interrupting the lesson is weighed against the disadvantage of interrupting the logic of the lesson (Gentile, 1987). Presenting the Lesson The beginning of each lesson provides the challenge of how to change the focus of students' attention from previous classes or discussions with friends to the objective of the lesson. The importance of eliciting appropriate associations prior to presenting a lesson can be found in research on positive transfer and advanced organizers (Ausubel, 1960; Bransford & Johnson, 1972; Emmer & Evertson, 1979). Research indicates that the learning of facts is greatly facilitated when memories of organized principles and prerequisite concepts related to the lesson are reviewed at the beginning of the lesson. The focus portion, or anticipatory set as it is called by Madeline Hunter, requires the student overtly or covertly have the prerequisites in memory. The activity must be designed effectively to elicit information related to the lesson objective. During the opening it is important for students to know the direction of the instruction, the relevance of what they are learning, and to have a sense of continuity. Students are often not able to see the relationship between today's work and the work from yesterday. Sharing the objective of the lesson informally with students would include teacher statements such as "what we are going to do today" and "the reason we are studying this concept." The body of the lesson includes the presentation of information; what Rosenshine (1986) would call the explanation-demonstration stage of the lesson. To implement this phase of the lesson, administrators should note that teachers have a wide variety of different styles and models of teaching from which to choose. The larger the number of alternative teaching styles teachers are comfortable utilizing, the more likely they will select techniques that match the desired objectives, learning styles, and academic levels of their students. Publications that describe a wide variety of models of teaching include Joyce and Weil (1986) and Bellon, Bellon, and Handler (1977). Other authors have described specialized models like cooperative learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1975) and Ethna Reid's ERIC model. Current literature is in agreement that there is no single right way of teaching or one approach that will be effective for all learning objectives. To determine if the best teaching strategy was selected administrators should determine if the teacher achieved the objective. While well over a hundred instructional strategies have been identified, there are some attributes common to all strategies (Joyce & Weil, 1986). Classroom observers should be aware that each strategy has a set of activities with a distinct purpose and role for the teacher and students. Each strategy has a logical sequence which is necessary if students are to accomplish the objective of the lesson. Therefore, the selection of an instructional strategy is a complex task because there are numerous effective strategies that could be used, depending on the instructional goal. Joyce and Weil (1986) drew from a wide range of teaching studies to organize the methods of instruction into four major categories which they refer to as families of instruction. Based upon research in education and psychology, the four families categorize strategies according to the intended learning outcomes. The families include information processing, personal, social interaction, and behavioral. The information processing family promotes a discovery process of learning. Methods included in this family stress thinking kills and the content and process of learning. There is no single right answer. Motivation comes from the natural curiosity of the students. Models in the information processing family are based upon the findings of Bruner, Piaget, Taba, Suchman, and others. Some examples of teaching styles that promote information processing are inquiry, concept attainment, and advanced organizers. The personal family, derived from the work of Rogers, Perls, Gordon, and A.S. Neill, emphasizes individual student development and problem-solving techniques. In this model the teacher assists the students in developing interpersonal and cognitive skills and creativity. It enables the students to determine and evaluate their own learning. Some examples from this family include nondirective teaching, synectics, and the classroom meetings. The work of Dewey, Thelen, Staffel, Glasser, and others is the basis for models in the social interaction family. The focus is on group problem-solving skills and the relationship of the individual to society or other people. Selecting a model of instruction from this family is appropriate when the goal of the lesson is to teach group process and academic skills. Examples include various forms of cooperative learning and role-playing. The behavioral family emphasizes convergent thinking and a linear learning process where learning is broken down into small, sequenced behaviors with frequent rewards for correct responses. This family includes the work of Skinner, Bandura, Gagne, Walper, and others who share an emphasis on changing the behavior of the learner. It is an appropriate method of instruction when the objective of the lesson is to teach facts, concepts, or skills. Examples of teaching strategies included in this family are direct instruction and contingency management. An ability to utilize several models in each of the four families enables teachers to review the needs of the students and the objectives of the lesson, and select the particular approach that is most likely to facilitate achievement of the learning objective.

Classroom observers should understand that the four families provide a valuable source of information for staff development training sessions. Monitoring Student Progress It is clear that good teaching requires diagnosing student progress during the lesson and adjusting instruction accordingly (Good, 1983; Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986; Hunter, 1982). Periodic and formal assessments of student learning through a mid-term or final examination may be helpful in formulating grades, but are not frequent enough to enable the teacher to adjust the teaching to correct for misconceptions. When observing a lesson, administrators should note points in the lesson where teachers should monitor instruction as it progresses to enable them to immediately respond to students' misunderstandings and insure that all students are learning the material. Checking for understanding can be done in large groups by having all of the students signal the response at the same time to the same question. This can be done with the use of their fingers to signal multiple choice answers 1, 2, or 3, the first letter of a word, or thumbs up or down to indicate true or false (Hunter, 1982). Other techniques for group signaling include the use of individual chalkboards, ceramic tiles, or laminated cards on which students record their responses with a grease pencil or crayon and flash the answer. A group choral response can also be used. Students' understanding can also be checked through the use of brief written responses, or mini-diagnostic tests. As students are completing the quick quiz the teacher walks around the room monitoring the approach the students are using to solve the problems as well as their answers, and determines if adjustment in teaching needs to be made. Another method would be a pair share where students take turns telling each other the answers to two different questions related to the same objective while the teacher monitors. Although some measures may not indicate specifically which students are confused, they do provide the teacher with the information needed to determine if the direction or pace of the lesson needs to be adjusted. Teachers who monitor progress as part of their teaching have all students perform some observable behavior congruent with the objective of the lesson while they check the behavior. They analyze the correctness and completeness of the responses and determine if it is necessary to reteach certain segments of the lesson before they move on. Once this is completed they proceed to the next concept--teaching, re-teaching if necessary, and providing the necessary practice. Conducting Practice Sessions Once students have an adequate level of understanding, research concludes that it is extremely important that students be given the opportunity to practice the new skill and its application (Russell & Hunter, 1977). In the initial phase, practice should be conducted under the direct supervision of the teacher. Hunter refers to the process as guided practice. The teacher moves about the room providing support, encouragement, praise, individual assistance, and re-teaching. It can be particularly effective during this portion of the lesson if the teacher utilizes cooperative learning groups or heterogeneous grouping strategies to form practice groups. This provides an opportunity for peer-tutoring while the teacher circulates among the groups and keeps them on task while monitoring their level of understanding. It is important to remember that individuals are only able to assimilate a certain amount of information before it needs to be organized. Otherwise, new learning interferes with the old and produces confusion. For longer or more complicated lessons it may be critical to stop and get closure at several points throughout the lesson as well as at the end. Students who actively participate in the process are able to reorganize the material and achieve greater retention and clarity of the information. Prior to allowing students time for independent practice, the use of summary or review statements helps students put the information into perspective and identify the key points. It is also helpful if the teacher identifies how it will relate to the lesson planned for the following day. Providing closure, at any point in the lesson, provides students with the opportunity to consolidate and organize what they have learned. After providing adequate explanation and practice in a monitored setting, students should be provided the opportunity to practice the new skill independently. To insure that this practice session is positive and productive, the material must relate directly to the lesson just mastered. Adherence to Curricular Objectives The third area supervisors are required to evaluate and assess is the teacher's ability to adhere to curricular objectives. To comply with this requirement of SB 813, administrators should assure that teachers are utilizing state frameworks, district curriculum guides, scope and sequence charts, and course outlines to assist them in planning instruction. Lesson plans should have a clearly defined objective that is appropriate to the class learning level and consistent with established district, school, department, or grade level curriculum standards for expected achievement. Further, plans should incorporate the needs, interests, and special talents of students in the class and include enrichment or acceleration activities for students who complete basic tasks early. Activities in the lesson should revolve around the acquisition of new learning. Planning should include a time line so the teacher can monitor the pace of instruction to insure that the intended curricular objectives are taught and mastered in the allocated time. Administrators should verify that a variety of ongoing assessment measures are being utilized by the teacher to monitor achievement of intended objectives. Information from these measures should be used to make adjustments to the pace, objectives, or sequence when necessary. Teachers should utilize district-adopted materials and appropriate supplemental materials to meet individual student's academic needs and learning styles. Teachers should be encouraged by administrators to participate in recommending texts and supplementary materials and developing curriculum so they can utilize their knowledge of students' skills, needs, and interests in selecting a product that will more closely meet the needs of students in the school or grade level. Suitable Learning Environment The fourth and final requirement of SB 813 is that evaluators verify that teachers establish and maintain a suitable learning environment. Therefore, each teacher should develop and implement clear classroom routines and appropriate standards at the beginning of each school year to insure the health, safety, and welfare of their students. This includes maintaining a clean, safe, and orderly learn The Effects of the Executive & Legislative Branches on Education in Schools By Timothy Lemke, eHow Contributor Congress has passed multiple pieces of legislation that affect public education. According to the Department of Education, elementary and secondary public education is the primary responsibility of the state and local municipalities. While only a little more than 10 percent of K-12 education funding comes from the federal government, it

would be a mistake to assume that decisions made in Washington do not affect public education nationwide. The legislative and executive branches of government can affect education through policy, legislation and funding.

1.

Department of Education The U.S. Department of Education was originally formed in 1867 to collect information that would help the states establish effective school systems. Upgraded to a cabinet position in the executive branch of the U.S. government in 1979, the Department of Education's mission is "to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access," according to the Department's website. The Department's programs serve more than 14,000 school districts, and roughly 56 million students, as of 2011. The Department of Education assists the president in executing policy and implementing laws enacted by Congress. Legislation

Congress has passed several pieces of legislation since 1940 that have greatly shaped education in America. During the Cold War, Congress passed the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) in 1958, after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik. The purpose of NDEA, according to the Department of Education, was to ensure American schools would produce enough bright young minds to keep the country competitive with the Soviet Union in scientific and technical fields. In 1965, Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) as part of the "war on poverty." Congress sought to establish higher standards of accountability in the nation's school districts, while providing all children a quality education. Even though education is primarily a state matter, what children are taught in schools is greatly influenced by Congress. Policy

In 1970, President Richard Nixon gave a speech before Congress detailing what changes were needed to reform America's education system, and he created the President's Commission on School Finance to help states eliminate wasteful spending. In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act, a reauthorization of the ESEA, seeking to implement changes in standardized testing, school and teacher accountability, literacy and funding. In March 2010, President Obama's administration outlined its vision for the ESEA that changed several aspects of No Child Left Behind. As these examples demonstrate, the agenda of each presidential administration greatly determines what legislation is presented to Congress, and what constitutes public education policy in the U.S. Funding

In an article in the "National Review," authors Chester E. Finn Jr. and Michael J. Petrilli argue that Congress needs to reform spending on public education. In their opinion, Congress continues to throw money at a broken system, which allows school districts nationwide to avoid making the hard choices necessary to balance state education budgets. The authors illustrate how dependent public schools are on government funding, even if it amounts to a small amount of their total budget, as it allows them to continue to hire teachers even during tough economic times.