Supervision in Transition

fTlODAY we are in a period of coM. operative supervision. It is a period of transition, in which instructional leadership is running after this and that program of promise as it flees from the tight-and-tidy concept of inspectional supervision that was all the rage earlier this century. What had seemed a simple and effi cient classroom assignment for supervi sion early this century turned into an almost complete rout of the staff forces by 1935. The meticulous attack upon classroom operation was overthrown in the revolution that elevated human re lationships to the seat of honor. Once school administrators and supervisors saw the way the democratic wind was blowing, they fled from the classrooms, leaving their check-sheets and other mechanical paraphernalia behind them. They sought other means of effecting teacher growth on the job. As they confessed their authoritarian sins at the altar of cooperative plan ning, some in turn expressed a re luctance to supervise the teacher in his classroom setting. In fact, some stu dents of the subject persuaded them selves that there was something down right wicked about a supervisor's point ing out defects in a teacher's classroom. If it were not exactly a criminal act, it could be classified as a breach of profes sional etiquette, akin to calling atten tion to a mole on the teacher's face. Classrooms were bound to be neg lected for a time as supervisors and administrators sought new programs for instructional leadership. The term supervision had become so odious, the reaction was natural. In reacting to questionnaires on the subject, teachers thought they didn't want to be super vised, their concept being limited to the inspectional approach that they had experienced or heard their neigh bors tell about. Titles of staff positions were changed to co-ordinator, director, resource person, helping teacher, and what-not. The term "instructional leadership" was substituted freely for supervision as the new period in the history of help-for-teachers got under way. Those of us who study this present period of supervision must do so with a realization that it is a period of tran sition, one that will continue to defy exact description until it has resolved its issues and conflicts, and has proved its principles through practice. What supervision is escaping from is much more distinct than what it is moving into. Certain characteristics of this exploratory period stand out rather clearly.