Case study 1
In Case Study One, Gerald Watson was working at low levels of development, expertise, and commitment. Martha convinced that Gerald's instructional routine was a serious weakness to student learning. Martha decided to use directive control behaviors in her supervisory approach. Martha recognized the problem and designed an improvement plan that she presented Gerald with the instructional improvement goal. She stated that Gerald's improvement goals would be to engage in more active teaching and make use of instructional strategies consistent with the science curriculum's goals. She directed him to carry out actions to reach the goal. Martha followed up by monitoring and providing him with assistance and feedback on Gerald's progress. Once Gerald had shown some improvement in teaching behaviors and motivation, Martha offered Gerald three op¬tions for learning more about the program.
Case study 2
In Case Study Two, a novice teacher Janice Smith's lack of …show more content…
Chairperson George Cantinni decided to use a col¬laborative approach with the teacher. After listening to Mike's perceptions, George shared his own point of view, then suggested that he and Mike both develop and exchange options for solving the problem. During the negotiation process, both Mike and George accepted, rejected, and proposed modifications to ideas pre¬sented by the other. Eventually, Mike and George reached mutual agreement on an action plan. George's suggestion that Mike independently design his own dis¬cussion questions and tape and review his class discussions was an attempt to move away from collaborative ana1 toward nondirective supervision. Their agree¬ment that George would be available to review Mike's discussion questions and audiotapes indicated a transitional phase between collaborative and nondirective
In Case Study One, Gerald Watson was working at low levels of development, expertise, and commitment. Martha convinced that Gerald's instructional routine was a serious weakness to student learning. Martha decided to use directive control behaviors in her supervisory approach. Martha recognized the problem and designed an improvement plan that she presented Gerald with the instructional improvement goal. She stated that Gerald's improvement goals would be to engage in more active teaching and make use of instructional strategies consistent with the science curriculum's goals. She directed him to carry out actions to reach the goal. Martha followed up by monitoring and providing him with assistance and feedback on Gerald's progress. Once Gerald had shown some improvement in teaching behaviors and motivation, Martha offered Gerald three op¬tions for learning more about the program.
Case study 2
In Case Study Two, a novice teacher Janice Smith's lack of …show more content…
Chairperson George Cantinni decided to use a col¬laborative approach with the teacher. After listening to Mike's perceptions, George shared his own point of view, then suggested that he and Mike both develop and exchange options for solving the problem. During the negotiation process, both Mike and George accepted, rejected, and proposed modifications to ideas pre¬sented by the other. Eventually, Mike and George reached mutual agreement on an action plan. George's suggestion that Mike independently design his own dis¬cussion questions and tape and review his class discussions was an attempt to move away from collaborative ana1 toward nondirective supervision. Their agree¬ment that George would be available to review Mike's discussion questions and audiotapes indicated a transitional phase between collaborative and nondirective