Teacher Supervision and Monitoring

Policy Brief 10(draft April 8 2010)

Some Key Questions on Teacher Supervision and Monitoring

1. What role does teacher supervision and monitoring play in ensuring accountability of teachers to their employees and to the children they teach?

2. What should be the balance between the external supervision of teachers for accountability and internal supervision aimed at teacher support? Can supervisors fulfil both roles?

3. Does supervision as formal school inspection have a role in the South Asian context? Is school self evaluation a possible route to take?

4. Do current models of supervision and monitoring pay sufficient attention to teachers’ differing needs; for example those of newly recruited inexperienced teachers as against those with many years’ experience?

5. Should teacher supervision and monitoring be purely carried out by professionals or is there a role for the community in supervising and monitoring teachers?

6. What are the basic tools of effective supervision and monitoring? How effectively are they being used and what steps can be taken to ensure systems are in place?

Executive Summary

The term ‘teacher supervision’ spans a range of practices from externally imposed formal school inspection to individual mentoring of individual teachers by colleagues aimed at improving performance within the classroom.

The approach to supervision in most countries in South Asia has moved from inspection to a decentralised model in which supervisors from the administrative side are responsible for supervising a number of schools in the sub-district.

A clear distinction between the predominate practices in South Asia and practice in other countries reviewed is emerging with the former continuing to focus on external monitoring and supervision of teachers and the latter on internal teacher supervision within the school

Most education systems in South Asia are moving to a point where they could consider strengthening in-school supervision

Investing in a model of teacher supervision which focuses on supporting new teachers would be beneficial to all countries in South Asia

Effective supervision requires investment in human resources particularly within the school, with a focus on training supervisors, head teachers and assistant teachers to use the key tools of supervision: reflective classroom observation and models of mentoring

The establishment of targets against which teacher performance can be measured and which are owned by teachers, is vital for effective teacher supervision

The time taken to develop new monitoring and supervision systems should not be underestimated. Ownership by all key stakeholders is key to its success.

1

770555

Introduction

Teachers in South Asia, as in the rest of the world, are arguably the greatest resource in any education system. Yet, ensuring the accountability of teachers to governments and to the students they serve, together with supporting them to improve their performance remain significant challenges both in developed and developing countries. Many different approaches to inspection, supervision and monitoring have been developed; some are particularly effective while others make little impact and are short-lived. This paper seeks to identify models which might be particularly appropriate in the South Asian context; both in terms of affordability and relevance to the education systems. A key factor in selection of approaches is their appropriateness for countries undertaking sector wide approaches. Hence the models focus on their place within statutory education provision rather than on project shaped approaches which are not fully institutionalised within the education system. The paper starts by defining teacher supervision before going on to consider provision for supervision and monitoring of teachers regionally within the South Asian context, highlighting successes and limitations of the current approaches. It then moves on to consider international approaches, drawing attention to those that have become embedded across a number of countries. The paper has drawn extensively on documentation from both regional and international perspectives. In addition a questionnaire was sent to key respondents in seven countries in South Asia to elicit information about inspection, supervision and monitoring in their respective countries. A matrix summarising this information is presented as Annex 1.

1. What is teacher supervision?

The term ‘teacher supervision’ spans a broad range of practices from externally imposed formal inspection of schools and teachers, to regular on-going monitoring of teacher performance by external supervisors or head teachers, to mentoring of individual teachers by their own colleagues within their own classrooms. Teacher supervision fulfils a dual function. Firstly as a monitoring mechanism for ensuring teacher accountability to their employees, to the children they teach and to the community, and secondly as a mechanism for bringing support to teachers to enable them to become more effective practitioners. Supervision can also play a role in accreditation of teachers, particularly in the assessing the performance of newly recruited teachers and in the appraisal of more experienced teachers linked to the awarding of incentives. Teacher monitoring also includes an administrative element in that it includes the monitoring of teacher attendance in addition to their performance.

Whilst some countries have dedicated inspection services which are totally independent of the school administrative system, most supervision is undertaken by administrative/academic supervisors responsible for a number of schools or by senior staff within teachers’ own schools. Particularly in South Asia there is just one supervisor who fulfils all functions, including monitoring, assessing and supporting. This can lead to role confusion and a tendency to veer towards practices which promote ‘inspection’ rather than ‘support’. This paper starts by exploring how these issues play out in the South Asian context before moving on to consider models that might lead to improved teacher supervision and monitoring from a variety of countries and contexts.

2

2. What are the most prominent models of teacher supervision in South Asia and how have they evolved over time?

The monitoring and supervision of teachers in South Asia has its roots in the Department of Public Instruction which was set up in all provinces of India as part of the highly bureaucratic system recommended in Wood’s Educational Dispatches (1854) (Sharma, 2001). Its aim was to ensure that standards were maintained and there are still remnants of the service today in the titles used by high level officials responsible for oversight of schools and teachers, like Inspector of Schools or Chief Inspector. Over time, however, there has been a gradual move away from the inspection role originally envisaged and today very few countries in South Asia have a dedicated inspection service. Where inspection services do exist, they are often more closely linked to school audit. Examples include the Department of Inspection and Audit in Bangladesh which carries out spot visits to schools, particularly where there are concerns about mismanagement; and the audit function fulfilled by the District Inspector of Schools in Uttar Pradesh, India for all secondary schools in the district. This has a wide remit including the monitoring of schemes and programs, facilities, numbers of teachers and enrolment of students.

The inspection approach has evolved over time and today almost all countries in South Asia have similar models of external monitoring of schools and supervision of teachers. The approach is a decentralized one in most cases, whereby a team of supervisors is managed by education officers working at District or sub-District level. For example, in primary education in Bangladesh, the Upazila (sub-district) Education Officer manages a team of Assistant Upazila Education Officers who are each responsible for supervising a cluster of 25-30 primary schools. Pakistan and a number of Indian States including Andhra Pradesh have similar models based on the sub-district unit (Tehsil in the case of Pakistan and Mandal in the case of Andhra Pradesh). Supervisors in these countries/states tend to be from the administrative side of education but they fulfil a joint role in that they are responsible for ensuring the smooth administration of the school, including the attendance of teachers, as well as for supervising teachers and supporting them to improve their performance in the classroom. The fact that many of the supervisors from the administrative service have no classroom experience brings the extent to which they can actually fulfil the teacher support role into question.

In Sri Lanka and Nepal, however, while similar supervisory systems based on the sub-district exist, they are complemented by a second set of supervisors who are mainly selected from within the teaching force; Resource Persons in the case of Nepal and In-service Advisors (ISAs) in the case of Sri Lanka. The ISAs, in particular, are very close to the school as they teach for one day each week and perform their advisory duties during the remaining time. Resource Persons are released from their teaching duties on temporary contracts and return to their teaching job once their time as a Resource Person comes to an end.

Sri Lanka also has a performance appraisal system for teachers, set within the wider remit of performance and aptitude appraisal for government servants. The objectives of the system are two-fold; ‘(a) to make activities of the government more efficient; and (b) to enable members of the public to obtain expeditious and friendly service

3

from government institutes’ (Perera, 2004). In education this takes the form of a Teacher Performance Appraisal (TPA) system.

The system does not just rely on the school principal but involves other teachers in middle management positions who act as appraisers for more junior classroom teachers. Perera suggests that ‘staff at all levels view this as an opportunity to recognize and reward good performance, and to provide support and encouragement, for staff to undertake learning and development opportunities’. The appraiser acts as a ‘mirror’ through which teachers can view their performance. TPA is linked to incentives (increments, scholarships for training abroad etc.), and while this acts as a motivating factor, it raises the dilemma of how to address support and evaluation functions within one system. It is reported to be more effective where it is followed up externally at Zone level.

Different Approaches: The two smallest countries, Bhutan and the Maldives, present contrasting models which differ from those in other countries within the region. In Bhutan a decentralised school based model is followed whereas in the Maldives the approach is highly centralised and is possibly the nearest to inspection of all the countries in the region. The Decentralised Monitoring and Support System (DEMSS) in Bhutan has been set up to monitor and supervise schools throughout the country. Elements include the appointment of Cluster Focal Persons, appointed from amongst the head teachers, who are responsible for institutionalising school level monitoring. The head teachers in turn are responsible for supervision in their schools. However, all teachers are expected to monitor themselves to improve their performance; a professional approach which encourages self reflection. Professional support to the whole system comes from the Education and Monitoring Support Services Division.

In the Maldives, teams of education professionals, including full-time supervisors from the Educational Supervision and Quality Improvement Division in the Ministry of Education, carry out supervision in each school every five years. The team, which usually consists of seven members, observe all teachers’ lessons, giving oral and written feedback. The views of stakeholders, including students, teachers and support staff, on the schools strengths and weaknesses are elicited together with recommendations for improvement. The state of physical facilities is also assessed and the quality of the academic and financial management of the school. While the system appears well thought through the Ministry of Education sees a need to improve further. In particular they are concerned that the supervisions are too subjective. They are currently in the process of developing standards and indicators to bring objectivity to the process. While the formal supervision model is highly centralised, schools do undertake their own self assessment. Based on this assessment school improvement plans are developed which include a focus on improving teaching and learning.

The role of the head teacher in supervision: A further consideration is the role of the head teacher in supervising teachers. Interestingly, while there is clear recognition of the important role that could be played by the head teacher in monitoring the performance of teachers and supporting them to improve their performance, hardly any countries in the region have made head teacher supervision mandatory or indeed articulated what role they might play. Bhutan is an exception in that head teachers have a clear role within the whole supervision system. The role of the head teacher in TPA in Sri Lanka is also clear but in most other countries the role is only expressed as

4

an expectation that the head teacher should supervise the teachers. This would seem to be a missed opportunity, particularly in terms of teacher support.

The role of the community in school monitoring: The final consideration is with regard to the Community’s role in supervision of teachers. Schools in most of the seven countries have bodies such as Village Education Committees, School Management Committees or Boards, and Parent Teachers’ Associations and there is some evidence to suggest that they might have a monitoring role. However it is generally understood that this role is restricted to ensuring that the school actually functions with teachers attending regularly rather than the bodies having a role in supervising the performance of teachers in the classroom. The case from Nagaland, India in Box 1 above however highlights how such community bodies can successfully ensure accountability of teachers. A similar role has been given to the new School Boards in the Maldives, though these are only in the initial stages of development.Box 1: ‘Communitisation of Elementary Education in Nagaland’,In Nagaland the Village Education Committees (VECs) have been given the power to disburse the teachers’ salaries and grant leave. As a result teachers are being made accountable to the community. Jandhyala and Ramachandran (2006) report on the process saying:

‘The steps taken by the Nagaland Government for devolving powers to local bodies serves as an excellent example of how to empower local committees and bodies. The Nagaland Communitisation Program was initiated with the objective of promoting government-community partnership for education at the grassroots level. The objective was to give teeth to the goal of empowered community involvement.

For the first time the concept of community participation went beyond the devolving of responsibilities to actual transfer of power to local bodies. Under this program the community was empowered through delegation of powers to the VEC to manage and supervise government schools, and ensure the accountability of government employees as VECS now disburse teacher salaries. Under the Communitisation Act, the VEC can invoke the “no work, no pay” principle and take appropriate disciplinary action against erring teachers. The deductions from the salary are used by the committee to fund any other school based activities.’

Finally the authors note that it was particularly successful because it ‘was not confined to devolution of powers in the education sector alone but also included public utilities, water supply, roads, forests, power, sanitation, health and other welfare /developmental schemes’.

Projects and Programs: Donor supported projects and programs have played a significant role in supporting the move from inspection to supervision. In many cases models developed have become institutionalised, with supervisors’ salaries being met from the recurrent/revenue budget. However, in other cases new approaches, aimed at improving accountability of teachers to the stake holders or providing greater support for teachers, are being developed outside of the statutory education service.

The District Primary Education Programs, implemented in many States throughout India, supported the development of District Institutes of Education and Training (DIETs) and associated Block or Mandal Resource Centres. Staff from these centres have a role in supervision of teachers in schools. However, while the DIETs have become firmly embedded in the education service sub-district resource centres have

5

not always been well integrated with the formal State School Education Departments. Hence the advisory role of resource centre personnel has not been that significant in many States. A similar situation is emerging with respect to resource centres in Bangladesh and Nepal and other countries are also developing supervision systems within projects and programs rather than as part of statutory service provision.

The key question here is whether such ‘project type’ interventions and schemes that are funded through program funding will provide an effective vehicle for teacher supervision. Experience so far suggests that the resource centre model is not the best route and that the best investment is to strengthen the statutory supervision service rather than exploring new models under program funding.

Problems with supervision in South Asia: One of the problems that has been touched on above is the different roles that supervisors are expected to play. De Grauwe and Naidoo (2002) note in particular that ‘supervisors are expected to play both the support and inspection role which complicates their work to the extent that they may not do either well’. Other writers comment on the fact that supervisors are drawn to the administrative with their role in classroom supervision seen as secondary to administration. (Thornton, 2004)

The Sri Lankan supervision model recognises this dilemma and addresses it by having a well staffed School Education Administrative Service, who are responsible for monitoring the administration and management of schools, complemented by the ISAs who focus on supervising and supporting teachers in the classroom. As classroom practitioners themselves they have the necessary understanding of the teachers’ situation and are well placed to support them in their work. Implementation of the model, however, has some limitations. In particular a recent survey undertaken by Wilfred Pereira found that: ‘The supervision visits to schools are loosely planned … on some occasions the planning is done only after the team arrives in the schools… It was also noted at the conclusion of the visit, though a common discussion is held the comments given are general and do not help teachers to improve their classroom practices’.

This description echoes the reports from many other countries in South Asia and it is only the Maldives where the supervision visits seem to be particularly well planned. The need for effective systems of monitoring and supervising teachers in South Asia is clear but evidence suggests that, with a few exceptions, most approaches developed to date are not functioning that well. In particular many supervision visits tend to focus on the on administration and management of the school, and there is limited in-class supervision of teachers. Most supervisors are also responsible for a significant number of schools and hence the opportunities to give in-depth pedagogical support to teachers to improve teaching and learning or engage in meaningful teacher evaluation are few and far between.

3. New Approaches to Monitoring and Supervision: how are models in other countries developing?

The trend away from inspection noted in South Asia is reflected in other parts of the world and a wide variety of strategies have been developed to replace traditional inspection services under which all teachers are inspected and graded by external

6

evaluators. As can be seen in Table 1 below, many countries have moved away from the evaluation of teachers by external inspectors towards an approach in which the teachers are evaluated by middle and senior managers from within the school. Increasingly, the models of self evaluation are predominating with the inspection service playing a quality assurance or validating role. In addition, it is interesting to note the role that teachers’ paid, particularly in the case of Australia for lobbying for fairer practices and greater attention to their needs related to supervision and inspection.

Table 1: Developing models of inspection and supervisionCountry Intervention Comment

AsiaMaldives The Maldives in the process of developing a

model of school supervision which places a greater emphasis on the school carrying out its own self-evaluation. The present system focuses on external supervision every five years by a team of supervisors.

The centralised process is reported to be too subjective and they are in the process of developing standards and indicators to bring in more effective judgement

Singapore Singapore uses the School Excellence Model (SEM) which is built on a business management model and relies on self assessment as a primary mechanism to drive school improvement (Ng and Chan, 2008)). An external team from the Ministry of Education validates the results of the self assessment once every five years against standard criteria

External supervision is restricted to every 5 years allowing time for the school to develop its own models of internal supervision

Hong Kong Hong Kong also uses a business model, School-Based Management (SBM). External School Reviews fulfil an external quality assurance role to make schools more accountable towards the government and the public, particularly students and parents as service receivers.

Teachers are concerned about the need to be constantly finding evidence to support their own evaluation – to the detriment of time spent working with the students in the classroom.

OtherAustralia At the beginning of this century Australia saw

a call for greater accountability of schools, as a result of which ‘government and non-government school sectors refined and extended schemes to make teachers accountable against performance criteria through systems of performance management and Annual Review’. These systems were internal to the school rather than external inspection processes. The case of Australia captures the concern that countries had with systems that were seen as outdated and too impressionistic. It took 30 years of reviewing and refining in the search for an effective approach to evaluation of teachers.

Teachers in the 1960s played a significant role in the move away from inspection. ‘They argued that the advisory and assessment roles of inspectors were incompatible, and that inspection was contrary to the growing professionalism of teachers. Union opposition to inspection was also grounded in complaints about unfairness, discrimination and paternalism.’ ( Kleinhenz and Ingvarsen, 2004)

England Arguably one of the best known ‘inspection’ services is that of the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) in England, set up in 1992. In the original OFSTED model a large group of inspectors (30-40 for a typical comprehensive school of 1,000 pupils)

The OFSTED model was developed in response to concerns about falling standards in schools. It was decided that a new rigorous inspection system would be

7

descended on a school for one week and examined all aspects of the school from school management to parental satisfaction to the performance of teachers and learning outcomes. Three lessons for each teacher were observed and a grade given. Schools were then left to deal with the consequences where a teacher’s lessons were graded as unsatisfactory (Cuckle and Broadhead, 1999). The intention of the government was to repeat the process every three to four years but the inspections were costly and there was growing resistance from schools who were finding the large inspections increasingly disruptive. The year 2005 saw the introduction of the current slimmed down inspection model which results in the same grading but is less costly and acknowledges the important role of the school in evaluating their own performance. The current model of inspection (carried out by a small team of evaluators) is an assessment of how effectively the school is performing against its own development plans. For the teachers this means that they are no longer all inspected and graded by an external evaluator. Instead, the inspection verifies the school’s own assessment of teachers’ performance through discussion with school managers supported by the direct evaluation of a small sample of teachers within the school.

instrumental in raising standards.

The experience in the original OFSTED model was particularly stressful for teachers and school managers. The results of the inspections were made public and much has been written about whether inspection should be used to ‘name and shame’ schools which are rated as failing. (Tosey and Nicholls, 1999; Cullingford, 1999)

The revised model based on school self-evaluation is based on teachers being evaluated internally within the school rather than by an external evaluator.

Netherlands

In the Netherlands the school’s own planning is also taken as a starting point for inspection. However, here inspection tends to focus more on underperforming schools. As the website indicates, ‘The Dutch Inspectorate of Education monitors a school’s capacity to assure and improve quality. If the school proves capable of monitoring and improving its own quality, the Inspectorate keeps its distance’.

Moving supervision nearer to the teachers: A clear distinction between the predominate practices in South Asia and practice in other countries reviewed is emerging, with the former continuing to focus primarily on external monitoring and supervision of teachers and the latter carrying out most teacher supervision internally within the school. However, there are signs that countries within South Asia, including Bhutan, the Maldives and Sri Lanka, are beginning to explore models which will place greater importance on internal school evaluation, including supervision and monitoring of teachers.

The question to consider is whether a supervision model based on school self evaluation would be relevant in the South Asian context – the case of the Maldives certainly suggests that it might be a possibility. However, De Grauwe and Carron

8

(2004) in their exploration of school self evaluation in Asia reveal that few countries within Asia are following this approach. They explore a number of supervision models and in each they suggest that strengthening in-school supervision of teachers by more senior staff is important. However, they also suggest that where teachers are poorly trained and motivated there should also be some sort of external control system – an audit model (similar to UK OFSTED model) is advocated. Relying solely on self evaluation, they suggest, only works when ‘teachers are strong professionals’ and where ‘parents show great commitment’.

Taking this argument as a starting point, this paper advocates that most education systems in South Asia are moving to a point where they could consider strengthening in-school supervision and that this would be a positive step in bringing greater support to the teachers. However, this still leaves the difficult question of how in-school supervision might deal with both this support role and with the evaluation role required if accountability of teachers to their stakeholders is to be ensured.

In the next section this paper explores how the internal processes which are required to effectively monitor and supervise teachers within schools can be developed. It focuses particularly on support of teachers but also considers evaluation; options for both new and experienced teachers are considered, specifically, (1) induction schemes for new teachers; and (2) teacher performance management and supervision of more experienced teachers. In each case, international best practice is first explored followed by a discussion of how it might work in the South Asian context.

4. What models of supervision can be used to support of new teachers?

Arguably it is new teachers who are in most need of support and hence many countries have induction programs for them. The induction programs serve two purposes. The first is to give support to new teachers, often through an in-school mentor, but the second is to assess the teachers’ performance and validate their teacher status. The experience from a number of countries is discussed below.

Who are the new teachers? Before considering the supervision needs of new teachers it is helpful to consider who the teachers are and how they are selected since the quality and experience of the teaching force has a significant bearing on the models of supervision and support required. There are two approaches to the appointment of teachers: firstly the appointment of teachers after they have gained a pre-service training qualification (normally between 1-3 years) and secondly the appointment of teachers based on academic qualifications alone. In the latter case the opportunity to gain a training qualification will usually follow, though in some countries, like Bangladesh, teachers may have to wait a number of years before the opportunity presents itself. New teachers, who have undergone pre-service training, are likely to be better prepared for the job, though in some countries attrition rates can be high as trainees often choose to enrol on a teacher training course because no other options are available. On completion of the course, such trainees will often seek other employment, hence wasting the valuable resources of the state education system.

Appointing the best applicants: A further concern with regard to the appointment of teachers is the quality of the applicants. In many countries, teaching, especially at the

9

primary level is seen as a last resort. The report by McKinsey and Company (2007), into the world’s best performing school systems makes some interesting observations. The most successful systems are those where teaching is seen as high status and where highly qualified graduates are attracted into the profession. For example teachers in Hong Kong and Singapore are selected from the top 30% graduating from their school systems. From the South Asia sample, India has seen an increase in higher qualified entrants to the teaching profession since salaries have become more competitive and other countries are moving towards a graduate profession. While there is a long way to go this is a positive start.

However, this variation in the quality and experience of new teachers presents a dilemma for the models of induction adopted. In some countries new teachers will have had no experience in the classroom, while in others they will have undergone an intensive period of training. Similarly, teachers in some systems may have excellent academic qualifications while in others they will be much weaker academically. There may also be considerable variation in ability and experience across and within schools. Hence, the induction system for supporting new teachers needs to be flexible enough to respond to these differing needs.

The McKinsey report also comments on the importance of the first years of teaching. They suggest that ‘Teachers develop the bulk of their instructional capability during their first years of training and practice.’ However, based on the systems they assessed they conclude that ‘the evidence suggests that the support given to teachers during this period (both in their initial training, and the support they were given during their first year of practice) was rarely as effective as it should have been’. (P 28) This presents a challenge to any country wanting to engage in a support system for new teachers.A number of the models they identify are particularly effective. They are presented in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Supervision models for new teachersCountry Approach to support Approach to assessment

AsiaJapan In Japan first year teachers are provided with up

to two days of one-on-one coaching and support each week from ‘guidance teachers’ who coach and mentor but do not evaluate new teachers during their first year in the classroom

Evaluation of teachers is not conducted until the second year of the induction program.

OtherEngland In England all new teachers are required to

complete an induction year, during which they are given increased support and supervision, a reduced teaching load that allows extra time for planning and training, and a regular performance review to highlight areas requiring improvement

Teachers are graded against a set of standards. New teachers must achieve ‘C’ status (achievement of core competencies) at the end of their induction period. Further information about teacher standards is included in Annex 2.

Boston, US

In Boston, mentors model, observe, support, co-teach and help with classroom management, lesson planning and instructional strategies. In-school mentors are supported by a team of 14 full time specialist mentors

10

The emphasis in all three countries is on the support role be it mentoring, supervision or guidance. It is recognised that new teachers still have a lot to learn and that the early years are crucial to ensuring that their approach to teaching is a reflective one rather than an approach which just mirrors their own school experience. In the US, a further reason for promoting mentoring is its impact on stemming the flow of teachers leaving the profession after just a few years in teaching. By focusing on the professional and personal needs of new teachers they are encouraging teachers to stay, thus saving considerable sums that were lost due to teacher attrition. (Kajs, 2002)

Assessment of new teachers, the importance of standards: The other aspect of induction is the assessment or evaluation of teachers. In most systems, evaluation and measurement against a set of standards or criteria appears to be an integral part of the induction process. Such standards are comprehensive in nature and well aligned with the policies of the country from which they emanate. See Annex 2 for discussion of Standards in Schools in England.

Who are the mentors and where do they get their support? Mentors are generally more experienced teachers working in the school to which the new teacher is appointed. Kajs (2002) suggests that at a minimum they should (1) be seen as experts by their peers, (2) have demonstrated the ability to analyse their own teaching using a reflective approach, and (3) be willing to handle the many responsibilities associated with mentoring. He also suggests that there should be a clear job description for mentors so that they are clear about their role. Mentors need preparation for their role – particularly training in techniques that will help them move away from the ‘inspection’ models that are so prevalent in the South Asian context towards approaches that give greater support to teachers.

Developing New Teacher Induction in South Asia: There is no evidence to suggest that any of the countries in South Asia have induction schemes for new teachers. Teaching can, however, be a very isolating experience for these new recruits and there is an assumption that the trained teacher ‘knows what to do’. Asking for support is often seen as a sign of weakness and hence new teachers learn to ‘manage’ without support. It is clear that they need support in any country context. Introducing an induction year for new teachers in South Asian countries could be possible and is an option that school systems could consider. The emphasis might initially be on support for new teachers, and once this is established a model for their evaluation could be considered.

The approach would need to be introduced over time and steps might include:

For teacher support: The exploration, at Ministry Level, of models of giving support to new

teachers from international best practice, including mentoring The selection of an approach in collaboration with key stakeholders; education

officials, teachers, head teachers, teachers’ unions etc. Identification, at school level, of teachers who could support new teachers:

head teachers, heads of department, teachers with a particular interest in supporting new teachers

11

Training for the teachers in how to give support; effective classroom observation, mentoring etc. This is a possible role for academic supervisors or for those working in teacher training institutes

For teacher performance management/evaluation: Agreement, at policy level, on a set of national standards against which the

performance of new teachers could be measured - again in collaboration with key stakeholders

Agreement, at policy level, on a system of validating teacher performance for continuation in the profession and steps to be taken if they do not meet the standards set

Agreement on who assesses the performance of the new teachers – can the same teacher who supports the teacher also assess or should this be an external supervision or internal management role?

Agreement on a time-frame for the evaluation process – many models suggest 1-2 years

Benefits of the approach The benefits of introducing a new teacher induction scheme are many. Firstly, new teachers will be supported in their work and hence will become more confident practitioners – this will have positive implications for their career and for the school. Secondly, the influence on all teachers of introducing a mentoring scheme with its focus on reflection is likely to benefit the school and lead towards an improved learning culture. Finally, incentives for mentors can be built into the salary scale; it would then support career progression and act as a motivating factor for teachers who take on this role.

Challenges to implementation: Introducing the scheme comes with a number of challenges. In particular the questions of whether more experienced teachers can manage to become effective mentors, given that they are more used to ‘telling’ than to ‘facilitating’. The model relies on new teachers being supported to reflect on their practice, yet reflection is not well developed within the South Asian education context. The other challenge is managing the dual role of giving support to new teachers and the evaluation of their practice. For this reason a two stage approach is advocated; first establish the ‘support to new teachers’ role and then, once that is working well, start to work on the teacher evaluation role and reach a decision as to whether in-school mentors can manage the evaluation as well or whether this role should sit with an external supervisor or another senior member of staff within the school.

A further more specific challenge for any supervision system which has not been touched on until now but which does need to be taken into consideration if school based models are to be developed is how teachers in small one-teacher schools can be supported in their work. Experience from India (Jandhyala and Ramachandran, 2006) of school complex models, where the principal of a larger school is responsible for a network of smaller schools give a possible solution which could be explored.

Changes in any system take time; the process can be ‘messy’ and complex as new ideas are explored and developed. However, if the induction scheme is well thought through it is likely to be much stronger and more beneficial to the teachers in the end.

12

5. Ensuring more experienced teachers stay on track. What models of performance management and appraisal of teachers are most effective?

Making sure that teachers stay on track and continue to maintain high standards is the next challenge and one that many school systems struggle with. Teachers, especially in South Asia, are often reported to be poorly motivated, with weak subject skills. They find the curriculum too hard for many children and become increasingly de-motivated when children they teach cannot understand the work (Thornton, 2006). In part, this de-motivation stems from the loss of respect from the public for the teaching profession, the limited support they get to improve their professional practice and the lack of accountability mechanisms – if no-one seems interested in the teacher’s work they are unlikely to work hard and improve their practice.

To address the needs of more experienced teachers, education systems have introduced models of teacher performance management, which balance the support role for teachers with an accountability function to make teachers more responsive to their stakeholders. While few countries in South Asia have specific models much of the external supervision carried out attempts to fulfil a performance management function. Table 3 brings together approaches from a number of countries, highlighting their strengths and limitations.

Table 3: Performance management and appraisal of teachersCountry Approach Comment

AsiaSri Lanka A Teacher Performance Appraisal (TPA) system has

been introduced in Sri Lanka. Appraisers are teachers in middle management positions and the head teacher. It provides an opportunity to recognize and reward good performance, and to provide support and encouragement. The appraiser acts as a ‘mirror’ through which teachers can view their performance. TPA is linked to incentives (increments, scholarships for training abroad etc.)

Linking ‘good performance’ to incentives introduces an evaluation function and the dilemma of how to address support and evaluation functions within one system.

OtherOntario Canada

The Teacher Performance Appraisal (TPA) process in Ontario for experienced teachers is designed to: foster teacher development provide meaningful appraisals that encourage

professional learning and growth identify opportunities for additional support

where required. Every experienced teacher has an evaluation year once every five years. Each evaluation year must be preceded by four non-evaluation years.

The emphasis is on improving performance with the evaluation function being restricted to every fifth yearAnnex 3 provides further details of TPA in Ontario.

Zimbabwe The Zimbabwean Public Service Commission adopted Performance Appraisal (PA) as an alternative model of staff supervision in 2000. The results of PA were linked to pay and there were fears that ‘the linkage of PA to salary might lead to some education managers implementing the system without due consideration of the complex nature of the human element and the principles incorporated

Implementation of PA has been slow and much time has been spent on ‘trying to perfect the documentation at the expense of the core business of teaching’. Teachers are concerned

13

in the model’ (Pretorius and Ngwenya, 2008) about the link to incentives.

Chile The development of a teacher performance evaluation system in Chile (Avalos, 2004) was a ‘lengthy and complicated process of negotiations between the three main institutions concerned: the Teachers’ Union, the Association of Chilean Municipalities (managers of the public school system) and the Ministry of Education’. The policy took time to be developed, the government and unions were in involved and teachers were consulted. There was clear agreement on the need for appropriate criteria against which to measure teacher performance. Above all, the teachers felt listened to and accepted the concept of evaluation, in this case by external well qualified evaluators.

However, even with this well accepted system a tension remains between an evaluation system which is formative and gives support for teachers to develop as professionals and a system which enables municipalities to remove teachers who are not performing.

The messages from the approaches presented above point to the need to ensure that (1) documentation is in place before embarking on new systems of supervision, like performance appraisal, (2) the need to ensure that teachers are fully involved so that they have ownership of the performance management system and will be prepared to be supported/assessed under it, and (3) to ensure that enough thought is given to how to tackle the complex balance between performance management as support to teachers and the evaluation function of performance management, particularly where incentives are concerned. However if these factors are addressed then systems of performance management, including performance appraisal, have much to offer to developing countries including those in South Asia.

A final note on experienced teachers: As shown above the linking of teachers’ salary to Teacher Appraisal can detract from the role that appraisal is intended to play in supporting teachers’ professional development. Yet, keeping teachers motivated is a significant problem, particularly where opportunities for promotion, as is the case in many countries in South Asia, are limited. The issue of teacher motivation, however, is not restricted to South Asia and providing incentives for teachers to improve their practice is one that many countries are exploring. Some countries, including those discussed above, are linking performance related pay to appraisal, while others, like England have a systematic method of awarding incentives (e.g. extra increments on achieving Advanced Skills Teacher status) to expert teachers, linked to a certain extent on the performance of the students they teach in standardised tests. However, Luntley, (2000) considers that this is too simplistic, since it focuses the policy debates on inputs and outputs and ignores the complexity of relationships within the classroom.

In the US there has been some interesting work done around the accreditation of the advanced professional skills of teachers through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). Darling Hammond (2008) in her assessment of the board draws links with other professional bodies in saying: ‘An analogue to the bodies that offer board certification in medicine, architecture, and accounting, the mission of the National Board is to ‘establish high and rigorous standards for what accomplished teachers should know and be able to do, and to develop and operate a national, voluntary system to assess and certify teachers who meet there standards’ (NBPTS, 1989, p. 1)’

14

While maybe beyond the scope of many countries the message is clear, if teaching is to be regarded as a profession then the same sort of measures of professionalism are required as in other ‘more highly regarded’ professions.

6. Introducing Teacher Performance Management models: what approach might work in South Asia?

The messages emerging from Performance Appraisal are clear. Any country considering the development of such a model needs to take heed of the Chilean experience and consider its introduction as a long term process. To a great extent the steps are similar to those outlined for the introduction of new teacher induction. However, the support needed by teachers may be less, except in the case of teachers who are struggling. With most teachers well established, the evaluation process is likely to be less tied to licensing or validation of performance, though consideration of whether it is linked to incentives, as in the case of the system in Sri Lanka, will need to be thought through. Key issues to consider include:

The government will need to work with stakeholders, government education officials, teachers’ unions, training institutes to ensure buy-in to the idea and eventual ownership of the system

Agreement will be needed on a clear set of standards against which teachers can be assessed, tied to Teacher Induction Standards and ideally banded to act as a motivating factor

Agreement will be needed on whether Performance Appraisal should be purely linked to support or linked to incentives

Consideration will need to be given to whether this is purely an internal school process, or if it is linked to a cycle of external teacher review, as is the case in Canada and the Maldives

Agreement will need to be reached on a time-frame which is manageable, e.g. in-school appraisal/review every year with full external performance appraisal every 4-5 years

The appraisers will need to be identified – internally this may be head teachers/senior teachers, externally this may be dedicated inspectors or staff from the regular district/sub district supervision service

Again, appraisers will need to be trained, in the same sorts of skills as mentors, since the approach advocated is again based on reflection

The foundations of supervision and monitoring: From our discussion a number of new models have emerged that could be affordable and would further the support and supervision of teachers in schools. Elements of school self-evaluation, including school development planning, could be possible though a comprehensive approach is probably too ambitious. However, models of teacher support, like new teacher induction and teacher appraisal are certainly options to consider. They focus on improving the teacher’s classroom practice and as such can be seen academic supervision. Monitoring from an administrative perspective to ensure accountability of teachers to stakeholders is also important.

With models of supervision established in all countries in the region, it is important to consider how new models might be integrated with current provision and what role

15

currently appointed supervisors might play. This next section looks at the role that the key players might play in the future. It then moves on to consider the basic tools of supervision and monitoring that need to be developed in any supervision system. In each case the role of the current players is identified.

The role of the external supervision or inspection service: All countries in South Asia have some sort of external school supervision or inspection service. However, the spread of inspectors/supervisors makes in-depth supervision of teachers exceedingly difficult. Hence, there is a need to explore how best the supervisors might use their skills and experience to have the greatest effect on the schools they support. The table below outlines the way in which the service might develop to improve the role of the external supervision of inspection service.

Table 4: New supervision approaches and models

Key Players New Approaches and Models Support to the processThe inspection/ supervision service

Supporting self evaluation of schools/ external assessment of teachers.Small teams of inspectors/supervisors visiting schools on a 4-5 year cycle with a mandate to work with the school and assess the effectiveness of the school’s planning and the performance of teachers.

Financing of the inspection service will need to be assured Standards against which to assess will need to be agreed

Supervisors (Admin)

Checking teacher attendance and supporting school development planning Monitoring is very much an administrative task and external supervisors, particularly those from administrative cadres, have a role to play in ensuring that the school is functioning effectively This is likely to include the verification of teachers’ attendance and support for whole school management but is unlikely to cover in-depth supervision of individual teachers.

Supervisors will need to develop an understanding of whole school development planning Criteria for school monitoring will need to be assured

Supervisors (academic)

Mentoring and appraisal – building the capacity of mentors and appraisersSupervisors who come from an academic background should understand how to assess the teaching and learning in the classroom. Such skills can support them to build the capacity of school principals and other experienced teachers to become mentors or appraisers.

Who will train the supervisors so that they can build the capacity of in-school mentors?

7. What tools should be utilized to ensure effective monitoring and supervision?

The introduction of any new systems; including school self evaluation, new teacher induction and teacher performance management or appraisal is a long term process. Any country considering the introduction of such systems needs to look first at whether the necessary tools and skills are in place to support the systems. Here we consider three tools; (1) Standards and Criteria; (2) Classroom Observation; and (3) Models of Mentoring.

16

Standards and Criteria: Any supervision or monitoring system needs a clear set of criteria against which to measure performance. This may take the form of:

A check list for monitoring teacher attendance and performance in terms of time-keeping, attention to lesson preparation, marking of students’ work, behaviour in class etc.

A set of standards against which teachers’ professional performance in the classroom and the school more widely might be measured

The Monitoring Check List provides a tool against which teachers are to be held accountable to their employees and to their key stakeholders, the children they teach and the community. Many systems have already developed such checklists, generally for whole school monitoring, so reviewing these to ensure they cover key aspects of teacher monitoring would be a good starting point.

The Teacher Performance Standards that are drawn up should reflect the country’s education policy and as such policy makers should be involved in the development of such standards. However, it is important to recognise that if teachers are engaged in developing the standards they are likely to be more effective and better owned by the profession. Engagement of Teachers’ Unions, Teacher Education Institutes and other representation from teachers’ bodies should therefore be involved in the process.

Teachers Performance Standards should be applicable across a whole range of teachers from new teachers to those with extensive skills and experience. A general framework, which can be divided into categories, would be a particularly effective mechanism for measuring teacher performance.

Who is involved?Monitoring Check Lists and Teachers Performance Standards can be used by a number of stakeholders as outlined in the table below:

17

Table 5: Tools for effective monitoring and supervsionWho is involved? Which Tool? How will they use it?

1 External Supervisors - administration

Monitoring Check-list

As a regular monitoring tool to ensure that teachers are adhering to their contractual duties including attendance, punctuality, attitude and ethical standards. They should also have a role in informing the community about the check list so that the community can play their role in ensuring accountability of teachers to stakeholders. External administrative supervisors should also be aware of the Teachers Performance Standards, though their role in implementing them will be limited

2 Community members

Monitoring Check-list

The Monitoring Check List may be shared with community members, including the SMC and the PTA. The community’s role is to ensure that they make the Principal/local government aware of any breaches of the criteria. It acts as a tool to ensure that teachers are accountable to their clients; the students, their parents and the wider community

3 External Supervisors – academic

Teachers Performance Standards

All academic supervisors will use the Teachers Performance Standards as a basis of all supervision and inspection of teachers. They will play a strong role in making sure that all schools are aware of the standards and in training key players within the schools to effectively use the standards.

4 Head Teachers/ Principals

Monitoring Check-listTeachers Performance Standards

Head Teachers will use both the Monitoring Check List and the Teachers Performance Standards. They will have a role in making sure that teachers are clear about their contractual duties and in responding if there are complaints against teachers from the community. They may act as mentors for new teachers and as appraisers for more experienced teachers. The standards will play a strong role in the assessment of new teachers for licensing/ approval of teacher status and in the regular assessment of teachers as part of the school’s own teacher supervision

5 Experienced teachers

Teachers Performance Standards

Selected senior teachers may support the Head Teacher by acting as mentors to new teachers or as appraisers for more experienced teachers. In secondary schools this role may be taken up by head of department while in small schools (both primary and secondary) there could be a dedicated teacher, who acts as ‘professional teacher’; an added financial incentive could be given for taking on the responsibility

A systematic approach to classroom observation: Lesson observation is at the heart of any approach to supervision or inspection. All supervisors are familiar with observing lessons but effective lesson observation needs to take a number of points into account:

1

Lesson observation should measure the students’ learning as well as the performance of the teacher. Observation of both teachers and students, including observing how they engage in written work or group work, is vital for understanding what is happening in the classroom.

Observers should restrict themselves to observing the lesson and not take over the class to ‘demonstrate how to do it properly’. This undermines the authority of any teachers

Good lesson observation is more than just observing part of a lesson then leaving. Sufficient time for understanding what the teacher is trying to achieve and the needs of the learners is vital for effective assessment of lessons.

Preparation and feedback should be integral to any lesson observation. Actual observation in the classroom should be preceded by a meeting with the teachers to discuss the lesson being observed. Feedback is also vital if the observation is to help the teacher to reflect on and improve their practice. Feedback should focus first on what has gone well and limit the amount of critical comments. Any criticism should be constructive.

The clinical supervision model forms the basis of models of classroom observation. Peer supervision is also effective as a tool for promoting collaboration amongst teachers and for helping teachers to feel comfortable with classroom observation.

Who is involved? Classroom observation will be widely used by all players with a role to play in improving the academic performance of teachers from the external academic supervisors to the teachers themselves.

Table 6: Who observes the teachers?Who is

involved?What is their role?

1 External Supervisors - academic

External supervisors will use classroom observation regularly during visits to schools. They will also have a role in training Head Teachers and other teachers to carry out effective observation using the preparation-observation-feedback model

2 Head Teachers/ Principals

Head teachers should regularly observe teachers, particularly as part of new teacher induction and as part of the appraisal of more experienced teachers. Skills in observation should be shared with all teachers in the school so that they are familiar with the model being used.

3 School teachers

Experienced teachers have a role in the supporting head teachers in observation related to new teacher induction and appraisal. All teachers should observe the lessons of their colleagues to support each other and reflect on how to improve their own teaching. Thus promoting greater collaboration within the school. New teachers can also learn a lot from observing more experienced teachers

Models of Mentoring: Mentoring is an excellent tool to support new teachers to develop as effective practitioners. The principles of mentoring are also very relevant for supporting more experienced teachers, particularly those who are struggling in their work. Key points to consider are:

Effective mentors need to have a good understanding of how adults learn and of how they can support them to become better practitioners.

They also need to understand how to manage the dual role of supporting the teachers in their regular practice and assessing their performance against

2

Teacher Performance Standards. Though, in the first instance the focus should be on support to establish that role effectively.

The mentoring role can include; regular meetings with mentees to discuss their problems, set targets and provide support; classroom observation including preparation and feedback; and assessment of performance.

Reflection lies at the heart of effective mentoring. The mentee should always be the first to speak in meetings; the mentor’s job is to help the mentee to identify and understand their own problems and then come up with their own solutions. Mentors should limit the amount of advice they give and think carefully about whether advice will support the mentee or make them feel even less confident.

Mentors need to be familiar with Teacher Performance Standards and how to apply them, good models of classroom observation and interviewing skills.

Table 7: Developing a Mentoring system

Who is involved? What is their role?1 External

Supervisors – academic

If a new mentoring system is to be introduced then it first needs to be understood. External academic supervisors can learn how to use and apply mentoring systems; this can then be shared with head teachers under their jurisdiction. Academic supervisors are unlikely to be mentors themselves as mentoring is usually an internal school role

2 In school mentors, Head Teachers/ experienced teachers

A school will need to decide who is to mentor the new teachers. This can be the Head Teacher or an experienced teacher who has a reflective approach and who is committed to becoming a mentor. In secondary schools subject specific mentors are most effective as they have a better understanding of the specific subject related needs of the teachers. All mentors will eventually need to balance the support role with the assessment role.

3 New teachers New teachers are the mentees. However, they also have to understand the mentoring process so that they can set their own targets and maximise the benefits of the support given. They also need to know the Teacher Performance Standards so that are clear about what they are aiming at.

ConclusionIn bringing together the experience from South Asia with international experience, this paper suggests that if teachers are to be effectively supported in their work and become more accountable, then supervision and monitoring needs to move away from external models and move closer to the school. The move has already begun with the shift from inspection to supervision and the trajectory now needs to continue so that teachers have regular support in school to improve their practice. New models of supervision need to be grounded in reflection and to focus on teacher support, with teacher evaluation only being considered when models of support are effectively operating. Key to success is promoting ownership through extensive discussion with stakeholders, including the teachers themselves, and the development of a good foundation, which includes national teacher standards together with tools for effective teacher supervision.

3

References

Ali, M (2000) Supervision for teacher development: an alternative model for Pakistan, International Journal for Educational Development 20 (2000) 177-188

Avalos, B (2004) ‘Teacher regulatory forces and accountability policies in Chile: from public servants to accountable professionals,’ Research Papers in Education,19:1,67 — 85

Cuckle, P. and Broadhead, P (1999) Effects of OFSTED Inspection on school development and staff morale in Cullingford, C. (1999) An Inspector Calls, London: Kenton Page Ltd.

Cullingford, C. (1999) An Inspector Calls, London: Kenton Page Ltd.

Darling-Hammond, L (2008) Reshaping Teaching Policy, Preparation, and Practice: Influences of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards in Ingvarson, L (2008) Assessing teachers for professional certification: the First Decade of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Elsevier JA

Department of Children, Schools and Families, UK (2008) Statutory Guidance on Induction for Newly Qualified Teachers www.teachernet.gov.uk/publications

De Grauwe, A. and Carron, J. (2004), Alternative Models in Reforming School Supervision in School Evaluation for Quality Improvement: An ANTRIEP report. UNESCO: IIEP

De Grauwe, A. and Naidoo, J. (2004), School Evaluation for Quality Improvement: An ANTRIEP report. UNESCO: IIEP

The Dutch Inspectorate of Schools, http://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/site/english

Kajs, L (2002), Framework for Designing a Mentoring Program for Novice Teachers, Mentoring & Tutoring, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2002

Kleinhenz, E. and Ingvarsen, L. (2004) Teacher Accountability in Australia: current policies practices and their relation to the improvement of teaching and learning, Research Papers in Education Vol. 19, No. 1, March 2004

Komatsu, T (2009) Qualitative inquiry into local education administration in Pakistan International Journal for Educational Development 29 (2009) 219-226

Lofstrom, E and Eisenschmidt, E (2009) Novice teachers’ perspectives on mentioning: the case of the Estonian induction year. Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 681-689

Luntley, M. (2000) Performance, Pay and Professionals: measuring the quality of teaching and a challenge to the government’s proposals on teachers’ pay, London: Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain

McKinsey and Company (2007) How the world’s best performing school systems come out on top

Ng, P and Chan, D (2008) A comparative study of Singapore’s school excellence model with Hong Kong’s school-based management, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp.488-505

Perera, W. (2004) Teacher performance management as a method of school evaluation in Sri Lanka in De Grauwe, A. and Naidoo, J. (2004), School Evaluation for Quality Improvement: An ANTRIEP report. UNESCO: IIEP

4

Sharma, Y. (2001) History and Problems of Education: Volume I. New Delhi: Kanishka Publications

Singh, P and Ashok, M (2006) Nagaland Communitisation Programme in Jandhyala, K. and Ramachandran, V. (2006) Enabling most deprived children to learn: Lessons from promising practices

Thornton, H (2006) Teachers Talking: the role of collaboration in secondary schools in Bangladesh, COMPARE, Vol. 36 No. 2 June 2006 pp 181-196

Thornton, H (2004) Support and Supervision of Secondary School Teachers in Bangladesh. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Birmingham, UK

Training and Development Agency for Schools, UK, (2007) Professional Standards for Teachers: qualified teacher status http://www.tda.gov.uk/upload/resources/pdf/s/standards_qts.pdf

Training and Development Agency for Schools, UK, (2007) Professional Standards for Teachers: core http://www.tda.gov.uk/upload/resources/pdf/s/standards_core.pdf

Tosey, P and Nicholls, G (1999) OFSTED and Organisational Learning: the incidental value of the dunce’s cap as a strategy for school improvement, Teacher Development, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1999

5

Annex 1: Matrix of practice in South Asian countriesCountry Inspection Service Monitoring/supervision system In-school supervision Supervision and monitoring

at the Community LevelBangladesh Directorate of Inspection and

Audit (DIA). Sends team of Inspectors to visit schools – usually in response to an identified problem. A limited number of schools are visited.There are also inspectors/ inspectresses at the Divisional Level but they mainly deal with issues related to school and course registration

Assistant Upazila Education Officers (AUEOs) manage about 25-30 primary schools each. They visit about 10 schools per month and report on school management, administration, state of the facilities as well as monitoring teaching and learning. Secondary Education Officers (SEOs) undertake monitoring of secondary schools but they are more thinly spread.

The Head Teacher is expected to visit classes and give support to teachers at both primary and secondary level

All primary and secondary schools have a School Management Committee (SMC) Their role includes monitoring school management, teacher performance and quality of learning. School Level Improvement Planning (SLIP) is being developed as a tool to improve school management.

Bhutan There is no school inspection service

Decentralised Education Monitoring and Support System (DEMSS). District Education Officers have a mandate to monitor schools and the staff at random. Cluster (6+ schools) Focal Persons, appointed from amongst the head teachers provide support services to head teachers in institutionalizing school level monitoring. The Education and Monitoring Support Service Division provides professional support service and monitors the work at District level

School Level Monitoring and Support System (part of DEMSS). Every individual is expected to monitor and support themselves to become more professional in their work – it is within the instructional responsibilities of the teacher. School level monitoring and support services are a component of the head teachers’ management responsibility.

India selected states experience

Uttar Pradesh: District Inspector of Schools (DIOS) fulfils an audit function for all secondary schools in the district covering schemes and programs, facilities, number of

Andhra Pradesh: Deputy Education Officers (DEOs) are responsible for the supervision of up to 100 secondary schools and Mandal Education Officers for 50-60 Primary Schools. Supervision should include teacher performance but

Under DPEP/SSA importance is placed on the role of the community in make sure that the school runs smoothly and Village Education Committees (VECs) are active in a number

6

teachers/students etc. In other states there are still Inspectors of schools but their role is more of a supervisory one

with limited personnel in-depth observation is not possible Similar systems exist in other states based on blocks or

of states. In Nagaland this extends to the VEC being responsible for paying teachers and granting their leave

Maldives There is no inspection service, supervision service does appear to fulfill an inspectorial role, given that its mandate is to assess schools every 5 years.

There is a highly centralised system of supervision with teams visit schools once in every 5 years. The team includes full-time supervisors based in the Educational Supervision and Quality Improvement Division in the Ministry of Education and other education sector professionals. The visits include classroom observation, interviews including parents, teachers, students, observation of facilities etc. Different areas of the school are ranked – including the standard of the students, teaching and learning, infrastructure, management and financial management. The process is seen to be very subjective and they are in the process of developing standards and indicators to bring in more effective judgement.

It is recommended that head teachers and leading teachers observe teachers and give feedback and that this is done on a regular basis but it is not mandatoryThere is a model of school self assessment based on which schools developed their own improvement plans which are verified by external evaluation. This focuses on 1. Inclusivity, 2. Teaching and Learning, 3. Health and Safety, 4. Leadership and Management, 5. School family and community partnership

School Boards, comprising parents, and people from the community, have recently been introduced. They have been given a lot of decision making powers over student issues like uniform and enrolment and with regard to staff; e.g dealing with disciplinary issues. Until recently staff attendance has not been a problem but with the introduction of a new labour law the role of the School Board with regard to school attendance may become more marked

Nepal Central level School Inspectorate with a staff of twelve. Selected schools are visited each year. There are two types of visits – regular and sudden. Both primary and secondary schools are included

Schools Supervisors visit 4-6 primary/secondary schools per month. Resources Persons (RPs) - primarily teachers deputed to work as RPs, visit schools at least two times per year – they are supposed to focus on teaching and learning but in reality supervision tends to be more general, covering management, facilities etc.

There is provision within the Education Act for the Head Teachers to monitor the performance of teachers in schools. This includes classroom observation and meetings. In practice the focus tends to be more on administration.

7

Pakistan No formal inspection system for schools though the literature refers to supervisors undertaking ‘inspection visits’. (Komatsu, 2009)

The District Education Officer (DEO) and Deputy DEO oversee supervision of primary schools. There are supervisors in each Tehsil (sub-district). Executive District Officers, Education oversee supervision in Secondary Schools.

Internal supervision of schools is the official responsibility of secondary school principals. Many primary schools only have teachers-in-charge. Supervision is very limited

Each school should have a Parent Teachers’ Association (PTA). They are intended to support supervision under School Based Management.

Sri Lanka There is no formal inspection service, though the inspection wing does provide an financial audit function

The Divisional education office established under the zone has control of about 40 schools. Supervision of schools is entrusted to the DDE in charge of the divisional education office. He/she is primarily is a field officer and is required to carry out school supervision, collect and disseminate information and guide the master teachers in quality improvement activities. He/she will have a group of master teachers (ISAs) About 7000 In-service Advisers are responsible for supervision. Some are subject specialists and each is responsible for 20-25 schools. There is also the School Education Administrative Service who are responsible for monitoring the administration and management of schools

Head teachers also have a responsibility for the supervision of teachersSri Lanka has recently embarked on the Programme for School Improvement which places greater responsibility on the school for its own planning and management. This is likely to include a greater focus on internal supervision/ monitoring of teachers as the school moves towards a model of self assessment

A stronger role for the community is envisaged in the new Programme for School Improvement model. The

8

Annex 2: Professional Standards for Teachers in England

In England the professional standards link to career stages and are arranged in three inter-related sections.

The professional standards cover the following career stages: Q – qualified teacher status C – core standards for main scale teachers who have successfully completed

their induction P – post-threshold teachers on the upper pay scale E – excellent teachers  A – advanced skills teachers (ASTs)

The standards are arranged in three inter-related sections: professional attributes professional knowledge and understanding, and professional skills.

The standards show clearly what is expected at each career stage.

Teachers attain Q - qualified teacher status - on successful completion of pre-service training. At the end of the induction year they must attain the C- core standards. If they do not attain these standards then they either have to leave teaching or appeal against the decision, after which they may have to undertake a further induction period. Most teachers, however, will successfully attain the core standards.

Each set of standards builds on the previous set, so that a teacher being considered for the threshold would need to satisfy the threshold standards (P) and meet the core standards (C); a teacher aspiring to become an excellent teacher would need to satisfy the standards that are specific to that status (E) and meet the preceding standards (C and P); and a teacher aspiring to become an AST would need to satisfy the standards that are specific to that status (A) as well as meeting the preceding standards (C, P and E) – although they can apply for an AST post before going through the threshold.

Further information on Teacher Standards in England can be found on the Teacher Development Agency (TDA) website by following the link below:

http://www.tda.gov.uk/teachers/professionalstandards/standards.aspx

9

Annex 3: Teacher Performance Appraisal in Ontario, Canada

In Ontario, Canada the rationale for Teacher Performance Appraisal is clearly laid out. The Ontario Ministry of Education website says:

‘High quality teaching is essential to improving student outcomes and reducing gaps in student achievement. The Teacher Performance Appraisal System provides teachers with meaningful appraisals that encourage professional learning and growth. The process is designed to foster teacher development and identify opportunities for additional support where required. By helping teachers achieve their full potential, the performance appraisal process represents one element of Ontario's vision of achieving high levels of student performance.’http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teacher/appraise.html

TPA is a two stage system comprising the New Teacher Induction Program (NTIP) and the process for more experienced teachers which is laid out in Box 1 below. As can be seen from the description in Box 1, the program builds on new teacher induction. Of special interest is the fact that formal evaluation of teacher performance only occurs once every five years, and is preceded by four non-evaluation years. While both support and evaluation are the responsibility of the head teacher, the fact that the evaluation only occurs every five years, enables him/her to play both roles.

Box 1: The Teacher Performance Appraisal (TPA) process for experienced teachers in Ontario Province, CanadaThe TPA process builds on the New Teacher Induction Program (NTIP) performance appraisal for new teachers introduced in June 2006. It is intended to provide a continuum of support as a new teacher successfully completes the NTIP and becomes an experienced teacher. Experienced teachers who have not participated in the NTIP will also benefit from this growth-focussed appraisal process.In addition Every teacher should have an Annual Learning Plan (ALP). The plan provides a meaningful vehicle for teachers, in consultation with principals, to identify strategies for growth and development for the teacher's evaluation year and for the intervening years. Teachers are encouraged to include parent and student input in the development and review of their ALP to inform their professional learning and teaching practice.

The model of actual TPA evaluation laid out in Box 2 below, builds on models of clinical supervision, and seems to be centred on a lesson observation though it is highlighted that this is only one component of the assessment.

Box 2: What happens during a Teacher Performance Appraisal?

1. Pre-Observation Meeting to promote professional dialogue between the principal and teacher. A principal must arrange a pre-observation meeting with the teacher in preparation for the classroom observation.

2. Classroom Observation to assess the teacher’s skills, knowledge and attitudes. This is only one component of the assessment.

3. Post-Observation Meeting after the classroom observation. These meetings provide opportunities for reflection and collaboration to promote growth and improvement.

10

4. Summative Report to document the appraisal process. The report is used to assess experienced teachers' overall performance and provide feedback about strengths and areas for growth. Teachers use this feedback when developing their Annual Learning Plan and identifying opportunities for growth.

The report includes: Competency Statements to focus the appraisal on the immediate skills,

knowledge and attitudes that reflect the standards described in the Ontario College of Teachers' Standards of Practice for the Teaching Profession.

A two-point Rating Scale — Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory. Principals can also recognize performance through comments on the Summative Report Form. (PDF, 74 KB)

The Summative Report Form for Experienced Teachers is a ministry-approved form in accordance with the Education Act that provides a consistent approach to documenting the appraisal process. The refined form eliminates redundancy and ensures principals' time is spent working with teachers rather than on paperwork. 5. A Process for Providing Additional Support depending on the outcomes of the

appraisal.

11