Question.3754 - For the purpose of this reflective exercise, assume that you recently accepted a position as school principal in a district where the principal is assigned the primary responsibility for instructional supervision at each school. When you interviewed for the position with the superintendent, you made it clear to her that you would take a collegial approach to supervision, including the fostering of teachers as instructional leaders. It is now just weeks prior to when you are to become principal, and earlier today you received a call from the superintendent during which she informed you that the results of the state’s annual high-stakes achievement test have just been received and your new school has failed the state test. The superintendent states that, while she agrees in principle with your ideas on collegial supervision, your first year as principal will not be a good time for collegiality. The superintendent tells you that in light of the failing test score, the coming school year will be a time for demanding that teachers focus on improving students’ test performance and closely monitoring teachers’ instruction to make sure it is focused on the state’s test objectives. You remain committed to collegial supervision, but you also prefer not to be relieved of your new position as principal because of a conflict with the superintendent over the best approach to instructional supervision. As principal and instructional supervisor, how will you address the superintendent’s concerns? How will you work with the school’s teachers over the next year to improve teaching and learning?
Answer Below:
Hello, professor and everyone; considering the scenario being discussed, I would like to approach it with my experience in leadership and the insights obtained from the textbook; firstly, I would acknowledge the urgency of improving test scores and its implications, as the school’s performance on the state exam has tangible consequences. Yet, instead of reverting to a purely top-down supervisory model, I would frame the process as one of shared responsibility and collective growth, both within the scope of an inclusive working environment so external stakeholders could also express their ideas. To align with the superintendent’s demand for improved test outcomes, I would initiate professional development focused on data-driven instruction that aligns with state test objectives, with the intent to ensure that teachers are equipped to target key areas of student performance under varied circumstances. Simultaneously, I would advocate for incorporating a collegial model, where teachers engage in collaborative lesson planning, peer observations, and reflective discussions centered on instructional strategies that directly discourse test score improvements (Glickman et al., 2016). SuperVision, as highlighted in the textbook, emphasizes a shift from traditional, hierarchical supervision to a more collaborative framework, from this learning, I would communicate to the superintendent that this approach is not in opposition to accountability but enhances it; whenever the teachers feel valued as leaders in instructional improvement, they are more likely to take ownership of student outcomes rather than being held down in micromanagement (Glickman et al., 2016). I would set up teacher-led inquiry groups that allow for continuous reflection on teaching practices, ensuring that test objectives are met through collective problem-solving rather than micromanagement (Glickman et al., 2016). Lastly, I would commit to closely monitoring instructional progress through formative assessments and regular feedback sessions with teachers, but in a manner that encourages growth rather than compliance, hoping that it will establish a creative space for the stakeholders to express innovative/creative solutions. The approach drafted can satisfy the superintendent’s directive while laying the foundation for a collegial culture that fosters long-term instructional improvement. By emphasizing both accountability and teacher leadership, I believe we can raise test scores without sacrificing the collaborative ethos I value. References Glickman, C., Gordon, S., & Ross-Gordon, J. (2016). SuperVision and instructional leadership: A Developmental Approach, with Enhanced Pearson EText -- Access Card Package. Pearson.More Articles From Leadership Management