Iranian Language School Managers’ Attitudes towards EFL Teacher Supervision

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of English Language, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

Abstract

Almost all language schools in Iran enforce teacher supervision with the purpose of promoting good teaching practices and higher standards of quality education. Despite its widespread practice, the body of research on language teacher supervision in Iranian EFL setting is scant. The present qualitative study explored language school managers’ attitudes toward EFL teacher supervision in Iranian language schools. Based on a researcher-developed protocol, semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven language school managers from Tehran and Karaj, Iran, whose managing experiences ranged from 5 to 18 years, with the purpose of identifying their attitudes, experiences, and challenges regarding supervision. The interviews drew upon emergent methodology to categorize the interviewees’ value-laden comments into five major attitudinal themes of becoming a supervisor, the requirements and responsibilities of a teacher-supervisor, evaluating a supervisor’s performance, challenges regarding teacher supervision, and supporting supervisors. The findings revealed that there are not any transparent criteria and rubrics for language school managers to draw upon to select teacher-supervisors, and supervisors are mostly selected based on their teaching potentials, experience, and merits. Moreover, the findings demonstrated that apart from observing classes and providing feedback, too many other responsibilities are assigned to supervisors in Iranian language schools. To improve the ongoing supervisory practices, the interviewees suggested the need for the development of transparent criteria and rubrics for supervisor selection.

Keywords


Acheson, K. A., & Gall, M. D. (1997). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers: Pre-service and in-service applications. New York: Longman.
Alfonso, R. J. (1984). The supervisory skill mix. Educational Leadership, 41(7), 16-18.
Allwright, D. (2014). Observation in the language classroom. London: Routledge.
Amini, S., & Gholami, J. (2018). Professional development of EFL teachers through rotatory peer supervision. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(2), 101-117.
Bailey, K. M. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Brandon, J., Hollweck, T., Donlevy, J. K., & Whalen, C. (2018). Teacher supervision and evaluation challenges: Canadian perspectives on overall instructional leadership. Teachers and teaching, 24(3), 263-280.
Burns, R. W., Jacobs, J., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2020). A framework for naming the scope and nature of teacher candidate supervision in clinically-based teacher preparation: Tasks, high-leverage practices, and pedagogical routines of practice. The Teacher Educator, 55(2), 214-238.
Chen, C. W. Y., & Cheng, Y. S. (2013). The supervisory process of EFL teachers: a casestudy. TESL-EJ, 17(1).
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Sage Publications, Inc.
Cuenca, A. (2010). In loco paedagogus: The pedagogy of a novice university supervisor. Studying Teacher Education, 6(1), 29-43.
Dangel, J. R., & Tanguay, C. (2014). “Don't leave us out there alone”: A framework for supporting supervisors. Action in Teacher Education, 36(1), 3-19.
Daresh, J. C. (2001). Supervision as proactive leadership: Waveland PressInc.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 1-28). London: Sage.
Diacopoulos, M. M., & Butler, B. M. (2020). What do we supervise for? A self-study of learning teacher candidate supervision. Studying Teacher Education, 16(1), 66-83.
Elfer, C. J. (2012). Becoming a university supervisor. In J. K. Ritter (Ed.), Supervising student teachers (pp. 3-19). Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.
Freeman, D. (1982). Observing teachers: Three approaches to in‐service training and development. Tesol Quarterly, 16(1), 21-28.
French, N. K. (2001). Supervising paraprofessionals: A survey of teacher practices. The Journal of Special Education, 35(1), 41-53.
Garver, R., & Maloney, T. (2020). Redefining supervision: A joint inquiry into preparing school-based leaders to supervise for equity. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 15(4), 330-355.
Gebhard, J. C. (1984). Models of supervision: Choices. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 501-514.
Gholaminejad, R. (2020). When the evil pops in: exploring the unheard voices of teachers working in private language schools in Iran concerning supervisory observation. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-24.
Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision for the Millennium: A Retrospective and Prospective. Focus on Education. Fall.
Gordon, S. P. (1990). Developmental supervision: An exploratory study of a promising model. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 5(4), 293-307.
Grant-Davie, K. (1992). Coding data: Issues of validity, reliability, and interpretation. In G. Kirsch, & P. A. Sullivan (Eds.), Methods and methodology in composition research (pp. 270-286). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.
Gürsoy, E., Kesner, J. E., & Salihoglu, U. M. (2016). Clinical Supervision model in teaching practice: does it make a difference in supervisors’ performance?. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(11), 61-76.
Hanna, M. A., & Smith, J. (1998). Using rubrics for documentation of clinical work supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 37(4), 269-278.
Hart, M. C. (1929). Supervision from the standpoint of the supervised. The School Review, 37(7), 537- 540.
Harwood, N., Austin, L., & Macaulay, R. (2009). Proofreading in a UK university: Proofreaders’ beliefs, practices, and experiences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(3), 166-190.
Hayes, H. S., & Wetherill, K. S. (1996). A new vision for schools, supervision,and teacher education: The professional development system and model clinical teaching project. Paper presented to American educational research association special interest group. Instructional Supervision 1996 Annual Meeting. April 8-12, 1996, New York City.
Hazi, H. M. (1994). The teacher evaluation-supervision dilemma: A case of entanglements and irreconcilable differences. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 9(2), 195 216.
Higgins, M., Morton, A. E., & Wolkenhauer, R. (2018). (Re) conceptualizing preservice teacher supervision through duoethnography: Reflecting, supporting, and collaborating with and for each other. Teaching and Teacher Education, 69, 75-84.
Hill, T., & Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis: it's time for a product recall. Long range planning, 30(1), 46-52.
Hoque, K. E., Bt Kenayathulla, H. B., D/O Subramaniam, M. V., & Islam, R. (2020). Relationships between supervision and teachers’ performance and attitude in secondary schools in Malaysia. SAGE Open, 10(2).
Horn, I. S. (2010). Teaching replays, teaching rehearsals, and re-visions of practice: learning from colleagues in a mathematics teacher community. Teachers College Record, 112(1), 225-259.
Janssens, F. J., & Van Amelsvoort, G. H. (2008). School self-evaluations and school inspections in Europe: An exploratory study. Studies in educational evaluation, 34(1), 15-23.
Johnson, D. A., Ivers, N. N., Avera, J. A., & Frazee, M. (2020). Supervision guidelines for fostering state-mindfulness among supervisees. The Clinical Supervisor, 39(1), 128-145.
Kapusuzoglu, S., & Dilekci, U. (2017). Development of the Artistic Supervision Model Scale (ASMS). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(7), 1192-1200.
Kayaoglu, M. N. (2012). Dictating or Facilitating: The supervisory process for language teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(10), 103-117.
Kutsyuruba, V. (2003). Instructional supervision: Perceptions of Canadian and Ukrainian beginning high-school teachers. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Memduhoglu, H. B., Mazlum, M. M. & Acar, M. (2015). Teachers’ perception about education supervisors’ communication skills. Kastamonu Education Journal, 23 (4).
Mette, I., Aguilar, I., & Wieczorek, D. (2020). A thirty state analysis of teacher supervision and evaluation systems in the ESSA era. Journal of Educational Supervision, 3(2), 105.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Moradi, K., Sepehrifar, S., & Khadiv, T. P. (2014). Exploring Iranian EFL teachers’ perceptions on supervision. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1214-1223.
Murdoch, G. (1998). A progressive teacher evaluation system [Electronic version]. The English Teaching Forum, 36(3), 2–11.
Nolan, J. & Hoover, L. (2005). Teacher supervision and evaluation: Theory into Practice. New York: Wiley.
Norris, J., & Sawyer, R. (2015). Hidden and null curricula of sexual orientation: A duoethnography of the absent presence and the present absence. International Review of Qualitative Research, 8(1), 5-26.
Ochieng', O., & Borg. S. (2011). 'We teach plastic lessons to please them': The influence of supervision on the practice of English language student teachers in Kenya. Language Teaching Research, 15(4) 509–528.
Pawlas, G., & Oliva, P. (2007). Supervision for today´s schools (8th ed.). Indianapolis: Wiley & Jossey-Bass Education.
Phillips, A., & Park Rogers, M. (2020). Examining the tensions between rapport with pre-service teachers and authority in becoming a teacher educator. Studying Teacher Education, 1-21.
Rahmany, R., Hasani, M. T., & Parhoodeh, K. (2014). EFL teachers’ attitudes towards being supervised in an EFL context. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(2), 348 359.
Range, B. G., Scherz, S., Holt, C. R., & Young, S. (2011). Supervision and evaluation: The Wyoming perspective. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 23(3), 243-265.
Salih, A. R. A. (2013). Peer Evaluation of Teaching or" Fear" Evaluation: In Search of Compatibility. Higher Education Studies, 3(2), 102-114.
Siddiek, A. G. (2012). The effective role of language supervisor in the enhancement of foreign language education in developing countries. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 3(1).
Silverman, D. (2000). Analyzing talk and text. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). (pp. 821-835). London: Sage.
Sullivan, S. & Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Tesfaw, T. A., & Hofman, R. H. (2014). Relationship between instructional supervision and professional development. International Education Journal: Comparativ Perspectives, 13 (1), 82-99.
Wallace, M. J., & Bau, T. H. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, V., Schlapp, U., & Davidson, J. (2003). An ‘extra pair of hands’? Managing classroom assistants in Scottish primary schools. Educational management & administration, 31(2), 189-205.
Zepeda, S. J. (2017). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.