Master Seminar Paper

A Differentiated Supervision Model 1
A Differentiated Supervision Model for Saudi Schools
EDCI 691
A Master Research Project
Presented to Dr. Ralph Martin
Department of Teacher Education
College of Education
Ohio University
In Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Education in
Supervision
Rashid Abdulkareem
Table of Contents
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION............................................................................4
The Problem...................................................................................................................5
The Paper’s Question.....................................................................................................6
The Procedure ............................................................................................................6
Limitations .....................................................................................................................6
Definition ...................................................................................................................7
Differentiated Supervision .............................................................................................7
Summary ..................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER TWO: DIFFERENTIATED SUPERVISION...........................................11
Components of Differentiated Supervision .............................................................11
Intensive development .........................................................................................11
Cooperative Professional Development...............................................................13
Self-directed development ...................................................................................14
Rationale ..................................................................................................................14
Teaching is a profession.......................................................................................14
The organization ..................................................................................................14
Supervisors cannot do everything alone ..............................................................15
Individual differences among teachers ................................................................15
CHAPTER THREE: SUPERVISION IN SAUDI SCHOOLS....................................17
Supervisory System in Saudi Schools: Background................................................17
Refreshing Programs................................................................................................17
In-service Training...................................................................................................18
Supervisory activities...............................................................................................19
Principals’ Role in Staff development .....................................................................20
CHAPTER FOUR: A SUGGESTED MODEL ...........................................................21
The options of the model .....................................................................................32
Intensive development .........................................................................................32
Cooperative Professional Development...............................................................35
Self-Directed Development .................................................................................38
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................43
References................................................................................................................44
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
For many years educators have been searching for new methods and approaches for
effective supervision of teachers. These methods and approaches vary according to the
different views of teaching, teachers, and the process of supervision itself. When the
teachers were poorly prepared, and the process of teaching was viewed as a process of
transmitting certain amount of information for a certain method of teaching, supervision
was a type of strict and tough inspection. The assumption was that the supervisor’s job
was to find all the mistakes that teachers did in the classroom (Daresh and Playko, 1995).
Finding mistakes was, then, the way for improving instruction.
The clinical supervision is influenced by the behaviorist view of focusing on the
external behaviors and planning for modifying them. The supervisor monitors the teacher
while teaching, gathers information about his external behavior, and discusses with him
the effective ways to modify them (Cogan 1973). Glickman’s developmental approach is
affected by the developmental theorists such as Erickson and Piaget (Glatthorn, 1990).
The teachers are assigned to the type of supervision that suits them based on their
developmental stage. Supervisors working with teachers at a low level of conceptual
development should be directive, with those at a moderate level collaborative, and with
those at a high level, nondirective (Glickman et. al., 1998).
Differentiated Supervision is among the latest approaches of supervision.
Differentiated Supervision aims to carefully consider the individual differences among
teachers, on one hand, and the human relations between the supervisor and the teachers,
on the other. Thus it gives the teachers the opportunity to choose the kind of supervision
they want (Glatthorn, 1990).

All the different approaches and models of supervision, basically, aim at the
ultimate goal of supervision: improving instruction. Improving instruction, which
eventually improves the students’ outcomes, is the backbone of every supervisory
system. Saudi Arabia is not an exception in this field. Supervision in Saudi Arabia, like
other countries, suffers from many difficulties in achieving its goals. According to
Starratt (1997) “there is no research that shows that supervision, as it is generally
practiced, results in substantial and sustained changes in teachers’ teaching”(p.6).
Many models have been implemented, but still the situation needs more effort for
reform. Problems such as lack of mutual trust between supervisors and teachers, tension
in relationship between them, poor staff development programs, ritual supervisory
activities, to mention few, are common in the school environment. The supervision field
needs a supervision model that can integrate the advantages of the other models and at
the same time avoid their shortcomings.
The Problem
As a relatively new country, Saudi Arabia looks forward to benefiting from other
countries’ experiences in the field of educational supervision. Supervisors in Saudi
schools do not have a certain approach for supervision. In fact most of them do their job
without even clear well-defined goals. Although the situations in schools and regions
vary a lot, they all, almost, do the same, within the general guidelines that are mandated
from the Ministry of Education. Thus, supervisory practices, in great part of it, are built
of personal experiences and experimentations. Because supervisors usually are appointed
without any prior preparation, the quality of their work heavily relies on their personal
abilities and qualifications, and, in many cases, on their willingness to work. Some
research studies have found a strong support from teachers and supervisors for the need
to revise the supervision system in Saudi Arabia. (Adwani, 1981, Al-Tuwaijri 1985)
For the first look, differentiated supervision has a potential ability to solve most of
the supervision problems more than any other model. The problem of this paper is
identifying the essential parts of the Differentiated Supervision and developing a model
suitable for schools in Saudi Arabia.
The Paper’s Question
This paper is an attempt to answer the following questions:
1. What is the differentiated supervision as it was presented by Allan Glatthorn,
and what is the rationale behind it?
2. To what extent might it be helpful for the supervisory system/practices in Saudi
Arabia?
The Procedure
This paper is going to present Glatthorn’s model of differentiated supervision. This
will include a literature review for the main sources of that model. Then, it will, briefly,
demonstrate the current supervisory system in Saudi Arabia. A concise critique, then, will
be made, pointing out the main problematic areas that should be considered in developing
the suggested model. Finally, it will suggest a differentiated supervision model that
responds to the needs and fits the situation in the Saudi schools.
Limitations
This paper is concerned with the differentiated supervision as it was presented by
Allan Glatthorn in his books:
Gladthorn, Allan A. (1984). The Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria: ASCD.

Gladthorn, Allan A. (1997). The Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria: ASCD.
Gladthorn, Allan A. (1990). Supervisory Leadership: Introduction to Instructional
Supervision. Glenview: Scott, Foresman and Company.
In-depth critique of this model or of the supervisory system in Saudi schools is
beyond the scope of this paper.
Definition
Differentiated Supervision
Differentiated Supervision was first proposed by Allan Glatthorn (Glatthorn 1984).
It “is an approach to supervision that provides teachers with options about the kinds of
supervisory and evaluative services they receive.” (Glatthorn, 1997, p. 3) The basic
premise in differentiated supervision is quite simple: Different circumstances and
different teachers require different approaches. (Daresh and Playko, 1995) In
differentiated supervision, as Glatthorn emphasizes, the term “supervisor” denotes any
professional providing the supervision services, including supervisors, principals, or
experts peers (Glatthorn, 1997). This broad view of supervision presents it as process
rather than a job. The supervisor, from this perspective, is not only the one who is in the
position of “supervision”, but also any one who practices the process of supervision.
Literature Review
Differentiated supervision is, relatively, a new concept. Thus, books and studies that
discussed it are few. It was proposed as a supervision model by Allan Glatthorn in the
first edition of his book Differentiated Supervision (1984). In this book the author
proposed four options for teachers’ professional development:
1. The clinical supervision,

2. Cooperative Professional development, which is a process of collegial
collaboration for the improvement of instruction,
3. Self-directed development, a process in which a teacher works independently,
directing his or her own professional growth.
4. Administrative Monitoring, a brief and informal observation by a principal.
In his book Supervisory Leadership (1990), in chapters 8, 9, and 10, he modified
the model to have only three options, which he called them “components”:
1. Intensive development, which is in fact a version of clinical supervision.
2. Cooperative development
3. Self-directed development.
In the second addition of The Differentiated Supervision (1997) the model seems to
appear in his full picture. The author gives the foundation for the differentiated
supervision including the rationale behind it. In the book the author presents two options
for his model: the developmental option and the evaluative option. Then the book
demonstrates in details its three components of the developmental option. At the end of
the book the author provides the readers with “a process approach” in which each school
or district develop its own model.
In his dissertation Differentiated Supervision Revisited: Towards the Development
of an Effective Supervisory Model to Promote Teacher Growth and instructional
Improvement, (1998) Jerry Jailall tried to “provide a foundation for an effective model of
differentiated supervision, by determining the extent to which schools and school systems
have implemented some form of differentiated supervision, and then assessing the factors
that seems to have influenced its success or lack of success” (p. 89). In this study, data
were obtained through the use of surveys, follow-up interviews, and review of written
materials provided by the responding school systems. The sample of the study included
28 systems in 16 states in the United States. (Jailall, 1998)
The following are the main findings of this study:
At least 28 schools and districts in 16 states are using some form of the
differentiated supervision.
The most important factors in the success of the cooperative professional
development option in the differentiated supervision were:
1. teacher input in program development
2. effective program design
3. high motivation of teachers
4. district support for the program.
For the self-directed option the factors were:
1. teachers’ input in the program
2. district support for the program
3. quality leadership at the school
4. maturity and skill of teacher
5. support from the school culture
6. effective program design.
The study suggests that, overall, the model was successful and considered by the
schools as satisfactory.
Ninety six percent of the respondent principals and supervisors believed that the
self-directed option is moderately to highly successful in improving instruction. Seventy

nine percent of the respondents believed that the cooperative professional development
was moderately to highly effective in improving instruction.
Summary
Supervision, in its constant effort and struggle to achieve its ultimate goal, has gone
through different stages and appeared in varied approaches. Each approach focused on an
aspect that it believed to be the most important in developing the instructional process.
Supervision in Saudi Arabia has been passing through the same phases. The
differentiated supervision model of Glathtorn has the potential to serve in facilitating the
supervisory system in Saudi schools. The brief literature review shows that this model is
successful in some American schools. The question that this paper will try to explore is
what is the differentiated supervision model and how it can help in developing the
supervisory practices in Saudi schools. This is what the focus of the following chapters
will be.
CHAPTER TWO: DIFFERENTIATED SUPERVISION
Components of Differentiated Supervision
The underlying feature, and may be the main advantage, of the differentiated model
of supervision is that it provides the teacher and the supervisor with ample variety of
choices in developing the teacher and solving the teaching problems. The differentiated
approach offers the teachers a choice from among these options: intensive development,
cooperative development, and self-directed development.
Intensive development
It is a modified form of clinical supervision, where the teacher undergoes an
intensive process of observing and modifying classroom behaviors. It is usually provided
to nontenured teachers and the tenured teachers who have serious classroom problems.
Glatthorn states three differences between the clinical supervision and the intensive
development.
a. Clinical supervision focuses on teaching methods, while intensive development
concentrates on learning outcomes.
b. Usually clinical supervision is used with all teachers, but the intensive
development it is used with those who need it.
c. The standard model of clinical supervision depends on one method of
observation followed by analysis and conference. The intensive development
uses different types of observation tools. (Glatthorn 1997, p. 38)
The Components of the Intensive Development
The intensive development option goes through eight steps. (Glatthorn, 1997)
• Taking-stock conference. The teacher and the supervisor discuss the matters
related to their work together. According to Glatthorn, this step is optional.
• Pre-observation conference. In this conference both the teacher and the
supervisor review the plan of the lesson to be observed and decide the purpose of the
observation.
• Diagnostic Observation. The supervisor observes the teacher to collect data
about the meaningful classroom interactions, in order to determine the teacher’s weak
and strong points. The students’ outcomes are a key issue in determining what to record
of the classroom activities. Video recording will be an influential means.
• Analysis of diagnostic Observation. Both, the teacher and the supervisor,
individually or collectively, analyze the data. The analysis should be in a holistic way.
The supervisor “should tentatively identify the nonteacher factors that might have
influenced the classroom performance and the teacher’s strength that can be built upon,
as well as assess the needs that should become the focus of the developmental process”
(p. 46).
• Diagnostic Debriefing. The teacher and the supervisor analyze the lesson
and reflect on its importance for improvement.
• Coaching Session. In this meeting the teacher and the supervisor agree on
method of coaching certain skills that seemed to need improvement through the
diagnostic process.
• Focus Observation. An observation that focuses on a specific skill.
• Focused Debriefing Conference. A conference that reviews and analyzes the
findings of the focused observation.

These are the steps of the intensive development as stated by Glatthorn (1997). It is
clear that they are a modification or a new version of the circle of the clinical supervision.
Some steps can be easily merged with the other.
Cooperative Professional Development
Glatthorn (1997) defines it as “a process of fostering teachers’ development through
systematic peer collaboration” (p. 56).
Forms of Cooperative Development
Professional dialogues
Professional dialogues are structured discussions of professional issues designed to
raise the level of teachers’ cognition.
Curriculum development
Curriculum development is a collaborative enterprise among teachers by which
they suggest some modification or create certain elements that fill the gaps in the
curriculum (Glatthorn, 1990). Teachers are the closest people to the curriculum, and their
views must be considered in developing or implementing the curriculum.
Peer coaching
In this form, a group of teachers agrees to observe each other according to specific
plan. After the cycle of observations the teachers meet to analyze the data and suggest the
following remedial steps.
Action research
According to Glatthorn (1997) action research, or teacher research, is a systematic
inquiry by practitioners into issues of educational practice, designed to deepen
understanding and lead to interventions.

Self-directed development
Glatthorn (1997) defines it as “a professional development process in which
teachers work independently to foster their growth” (p. 70). This option is intended to suit
the experienced competent teachers, who usually prefer to work on their own to develop
themselves. Their professional development comes mainly through personal initiatives.
“A teacher sets one or more growth goals for the year, develops a plan to achieve the
goals, carries out the plan, and assesses and reports on progress. The supervisor plays a
supportive role and does not take an active or controlling part.” (Glatthorn 1997, p. 71)
Rationale
Glatthorn (1997) states four arguments as a rationale for the differentiated
supervision.
Teaching is a profession
Teaching should be seen as a profession, not a craft. The teachers should not wait
for the supervisor who always has the solutions for the teacher’s problem. “Teacher
should have more control over their professional development, within generally accepted
professional standards” (Glatthorn 1997, p. 4). Teachers can work themselves for their
professional development.
The organization
Working in a collegial school environment where teachers serve as sources of
support and feedback motivates teacher is essential for school effectiveness. “One of the
best ways to foster collegiality is with a differentiated system that strongly emphasizes
cooperation and mutual assistance. A key component of the differentiated approach
enables teachers to work together, helping each other grow professionally. Evidence from
several case studies of this approach suggest that teachers involved in such programs feel
a greater spirit of cooperation and trust of other teachers” (Glatthorn 1997, p.5).
Supervisors cannot do everything alone
One of the main problems that face supervisors is their inability to work effectively
with large number of teachers. Visiting all the teachers is time-consuming and prevents
from concentrating efforts in areas that need improvement. “Differentiated supervision
enables the supervisor to focus clinical efforts on those teachers needing or requesting
them, rather than providing them perfunctory ritualistic visits for all teachers” (Glatthorn
1997,p.5).
Individual differences among teachers
It goes without saying that teachers differ in their skills, abilities, and motivations.
Differentiated supervision puts this fact into consideration, and tries to provide teachers
with several options to improve teaching. They vary in their preferences for professional
development strategies, as well.
By examining these arguments that Glatthorn stated as a rationale for his model, we
find that they are all exist in the Saudi schools. The following points are supportive
arguments for Glatthorn’s rationale that can be said concerning the Saudi schools:
Staffing System
Staffing in Saudi schools is completely different from staffing in the US. By law,
the new Saudi teacher possesses the job the second year if he or she gets more than
“good” in the final appraisal. Neither the district nor the Ministry of Education has the
authority to dismiss a teacher without legitimate evidences that prove him or her to be
inappropriate for teaching. This, in fact, makes it obligatory for the supervisor to present
more development options for the teachers.
Payment and Time
Saudi teachers are paid for 12 months a year. The real school days are no longer
than 8 months. There is a plenty of time for teachers to arrange and carry out their own
developmental programs.
In addition to the variety of options, flexibility is a distinctive feature that makes the
differentiated model applicable and practical. Glatthorn recommends that each school or
district develop its own model of the differentiated supervision; the model that best suits
its environment. (Glatthorn, 1997)
Generally speaking, there are three main advantages of the differentiated
supervision:
1. It looks at supervision as a process not a position. Thus whoever practices or
can practice supervision is considered a supervisor.
2. In incorporates other models, or goes along with them, which enriches the
differentiated model of supervision.
3. It is flexible; every school is able to develop own model.
Summary
In this chapter differentiated supervision was briefly presented as it was proposed
by Allan Glatthorn. The next chapter will throw some light on supervision in Saudi
schools to have a background for the suggested model. This also will help to judge
whether this model is applicable in Saudi schools or not.

CHAPTER THREE: SUPERVISION IN SAUDI SCHOOLS
Supervisory System in Saudi Schools: Background
The educational system in Saudi Arabia is very centralized. Virtually, all
supervisory practices are outlined and planned by the Ministry of Education. Districts,
(called educational directorates), have to implement these plans. They have little freedom
to modify the outlines of these plans. However, they can modify the content of these
outlines.
Educational Directorates adopt the system of the subject supervisor. Each
directorate has a unit for each subject with number of supervisors according to the
number of teachers in that directorate area. Every unit is supposed to carry out its staff
development plans and supervision activities.
In general there are three types of staff development programs in Saudi schools.
Refreshing Programs
At the beginning of the academic year, usually there is a staff development activity
called refreshing meetings. They take the form of large-group awareness sessions. They
range from three to five days and three to four hours a day. Usually, teachers start coming
to school three weeks before students. This program is held before the actual beginning
of the school. The supervisor plans the meeting sessions and usually engages some of the
experienced teachers. Almost all teachers are expected to attend, and more attention is
paid to the new ones. The activities vary. They typically include lectures, workshops, and
model lessons. The supervisor strategy is explained, handouts are distributed and certain
readings are recommended. This program is handled with little formality and no
evaluation is made. It heavily depends on the experience, effectiveness of the
supervisor(s) in charge, and his human relations with the teachers.
The lack of clear goals, inaccurate plans, not meeting the teachers’ needs, and the
incompetent presenters are the main shortcomings of this program. These shortcomings
result that the teacher, and sometimes the principals, do not take it seriously. Sparks and
Hirsh (1997) state that “Critics have long argued that this ‘sit and get’ form of staff
development, in which educators are passive recipients of received wisdom from
‘experts’ has produced little lasting change in the classroom” (p. 52).
In-service Training
Every year each unit in the educational directorate organizes a short-term in-service
training program. These programs take forty-five training hours. The unit supervisors are
responsible for managing these programs. They usually ask participation from experts
such as college professors. On contrast to the refreshing programs, the outlines of these
programs are planned by the General Department of Supervision in the Ministry of
Education. The number of trainees is limited and they are appointed by names by the
subject supervisors. Trainers and trainees are paid by the district. An evaluation
questionnaire is distributed to the teachers at the end of the program.
This program is more sophisticated than the refreshing program and it takes more
planning and preparation from the supervisors. There is no qualified staff development
specialist, so the supervisors are expected to carry on the whole process of the training
program, which in many cases is beyond their capacity.
Typically, supervisors and school principals are eligible to enroll in a full time in-
service training program for one semester, (four months), in one of the education
colleges. The classes include supervision or school principalship, educational
measurement, curriculum and teaching methods, psychology of childhood and
adolescence, educational evaluation, human relations, and instructional technology.
Being a “one shot” program with out any follow up lessens the expected benefits
from these programs.
Supervisory activities
In addition to those programs, supervisors, as part of their job, are encouraged to
arrange professional development activities during the school year. Making one or two
visits a year to a teacher is the typical process of supervision. By the end of the year, each
supervisor has to submit to the General department of Supervision a report about his
activities during the year. These activities include conferences, meetings, workshops,
model lessons, teachers’ mutual visits, and classroom visits. Naturally, supervisors vary a
lot in carrying out these activities depending on their experience, qualifications, and the
nature of the teachers who work with them. Unfortunately, there are no accurate
evaluation methods to assess the supervisors’ work (Ministry of Education, 1998).
Supervisors, typically, are assigned from the competent teachers. There is no
specific academic qualifications or requirement. Teachers apply or are nominated by the
districts. Certain conditions, set in advance by the Ministry of Education, must be met.
Among these conditions are:
1. To have at least 4 years of teaching experience
2. To have recommendations from the subject supervisor, the principal, and the
superintendent.
The nominee undertakes a proficiency test in the General Directorate. If he passes,
then, a committee will interview him. This committee, based on the result of the
interview, will recommend whether to appoint him or not.
Principals’ Role in Staff development
The principals’ role in staff development in Saudi schools is almost passive. They
view staff development as the supervisors’ task. Usually, their involvement is limited in
arranging for the speakers or preparing the place for meetings. Too often, some of them
have looked for staff development as a second consideration. Research in the school
improvement area emphasized the critical role of the principal on that area (Dufour,
1991). With the absence of the proactive principal, the gap will widen in the process of
school improvement in Saudi schools.
Summary
The aim of this chapter was to present a general idea about supervision in Saudi
Arabia. This background is meant to help in understanding how the suggested model is
expected to work. In the next chapter, a model of the differentiated supervision will be
proposed.
CHAPTER FOUR: A SUGGESTED MODEL
The Model
In an effort to avoid the problems and weaknesses of the supervisory system in
Saudi schools, and to take advantages of the differentiated supervision, the following
supervision model is proposed as a framework for supervision in Saudi schools.
The following assumption forms this suggested model of differentiated supervision.
According to Wood et al. (1981) most of these assumptions are supported by research
findings.
1. In order for teachers to stay current and effective, they should be involved in staff
development throughout their work.
2. Significant improvement in educational practice takes considerable time and is the
result of systematic, long-range staff development.
3. Staff development should have an impact on the quality of the school program
and focus on helping teachers improving their abilities to perform their
professional responsibilities.
4. Adult learners are motivated to risk learning new behaviors when they believe
they have control over the learning situation and are free from threat of failure.
5. Teachers vary widely in their professional competencies, readiness and
approaches to learning.
6. Professional growth requires personal and group commitment to new performance
norms.
7. Organizational health including factors such as social climate, trust, open
communication, and peer support for change in practice influence the success of
professional development programs.
8. School principal has a crucial role in any staff development program.
9. Supervisor cannot provide time, energy, and expertise needed for supervising,
coaching and support of new skills and behavior acquired by teachers. (Rodriguez
and Johnston. 1986, Zumwalt (Edit)).
This model goes through four stages: (See Wood et al. (1981) p 63)
I. Readiness
Readiness is the extent to which teachers have the ability and willingness to
accomplish a specific task (Hersey et al. 1993). In this stage the school and district
climate is set for the model. Teachers should be informed of the model, its benefits for
them and for the students, and the importance of their active participation. Achieving
teachers’ commitment is important in this stage. Also a climate that supports change and
innovation should be created.
At the three weeks period that usually precedes the students’ arrival, supervisors
held meetings with the teachers and principals in different places to present the idea of
differentiated supervision. The following points should be addressed:
1. Teachers’ empowerment is not solely the supervisors’ job.
2. The main assumption of the differentiated supervision and its components.
3. The mechanism of arranging the teachers.
By coordinating with supervisors the principal of each school assigns, through
nomination, a committee of two teachers, in addition to himself, to take responsibility of

the differentiated supervision in their school. The load of those teachers should be
reduced. This committee works as a task force for teacher development in each school.
This committee has to inform teachers about differentiated supervision strategies
and options. The needed information should be available for every teacher. A detailed
explanation for each option and its merits should be also provided.
It is the supervisor responsibility to raise the level of readiness. It is important that
the supervisors and the principals show their high expectations and genuine confidence in
teachers. This will make teachers more responsive and willing to participate effectively in
the model (Hersey et al. 1993).
Hord, Rutherford, Austin and Hall (1987) offered the following suggestions for
interventions at the various levels of teachers’ concern while arranging staff development
program (DuFour 1991,p.66):
Stage 0: Awareness Concerns ("What is the innovation?")
If possible, involve teachers in discussions and decisions about the innovation and
its implementation.
Share enough information to arouse interest, but not so much that it overwhelms.
Acknowledge that a lack of awareness is expected and reasonable, and that no
questions about the innovation are foolish.
Encourage unaware persons to talk with colleagues who know about the innovation.
Take steps to minimize gossip and inaccurate sharing of information about the
innovation.
ٍStage 1: Informational Concerns
( I need to know more about the innovation.")

Provide clear and accurate information about the innovation.
Use a variety of ways to share information--verbally, in writing, and through any
available media. Communicate with individuals and with small and large groups.
Have persons who have used the innovation in other settings visit with your
teachers. Visits to user schools could also be arranged.
Help teachers see how the innovation relates to their current practices, both in
regard to similarities and differences.
Be enthusiastic and enhance the visibility of others who are excited.
Stage 2: Personal Concerns
(How will the innovation affect me?")
Legitimize the existence and expression of personal concerns. Knowing that these
concerns are common and that others have them can be comforting.
Use personal notes and conversations to provide encouragement and reinforce
personal adequacy.
Connect these teachers with others whose personal concerns have diminished and
who will be supportive.
Show how the innovation can be implemented sequentially rather than in one big
leap. It is important to establish expectations that are attainable.
Do not push innovation use, but encourage and support it while maintaining
expectations.
Stage 3: Management Concerns
(How will I find time to do this?")

Clarify the steps and components of the innovation. Provide answers that address
the small, specific "how-to" issues that are so often the cause of management concerns.
Demonstrate exact and practical solutions to the logistical problems that contribute
to these concerns.
Help teachers sequence specific activities and set timelines for their
accomplishments.
Attend to the immediate demands of the innovation, not what will be or could be in
the future.
Stage 4: Consequence Concerns
("How is my use of the innovation affecting kids?")
Provide these individuals with opportunities to visit other settings in which the
innovation is in use and to attend conferences on the topic.
Provide them with positive feedback and needed support.
Find opportunities for these staff members to share their skills with others.
Share information pertaining to the innovation with them.
Stage 5: Collaboration
("I would like to discuss my findings and ideas with others.")
Provide these individuals with opportunities to develop those skills necessary for
working collaboratively.
Bring together these persons, both within and outside the school, who are interested
in collaboration.
Help the collaborators establish reasonable expectations and guidelines for the
collaborative effort.
Use them to provide technical assistance to others who need assistance.
Encourage the collaborators, but do not attempt to force collaboration on those who
are not interested.
Stage 6: Refocusing Concerns
("I have an idea for improving upon the innovation.")
Respect and encourage the interest that these persons have for finding a better way.
Help channel their ideas and energies in ways that will be productive rather than
counterproductive.
Encourage them to act on their concerns for program improvement.
Help them access the resources they may need to refine their ideas and put them
into practice.
Be aware of and willing to accept the fact that these staff members may replace or
significantly modify the existing innovations.
As usual, supervisors should not expect a high level of readiness, since this model is
a new thing especially for Saudi teachers who most of them, as most of the teachers all
over the world, think that experience is enough for them to be good teachers. Supervisors
also should remember that no one (including themselves) learns how to do things all at
once.
Motivation is a vital factor in achieving the state of readiness among teachers. It is
part of the supervisor and principal’s role to motivate teachers for both joining and
participating in this model’s activities.

II. Planning
Planning is deciding in advance what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and who is
to do it (Koontz et al 1984). In this stage the specific objectives are set, and the detailed
plans for achieving the desired goals are developed. Teachers should participate in this
stage, by suggesting and defining objectives and how to achieve them. Teacher must
never feel that they are strangers in this model. They should feel that they are responsible
for planning for their development activities. “Because they are adults and because they
are professionals, teachers know that they, too, should have some power in determining
the professional development topics and activities which they need and in which they will
participate” (Rodriguez and Johnston. 1986, p. 88).
What is going to be conducted in the model should be written in this stage. A
detailed schedule for each activity is developed, in which when, what, how, and where
are clarified.
While planning the model activities four important factors should be put into
consideration:
1. The principles of the adult learning
Bents and Howey (Dillon-Peterson 19981) state the following adult learning
principles that facilitate staff development programs:
a. Adults are motivated to learn as they experience needs and interests that
learning will satisfy. Activities should start from and revolve around teachers’ needs and
interests.
b. Adult orientation to learning is life-centered. Activities should be planned
around life situation not subjects.

c. Adults learn best by experience.
d. Adults have the need to be self-directing.
e. Individual differences are more significant among adults.
These principles should be incorporated into the activities of this model regardless
of the format, process, or content. (Zepeda, 1999. see also Glickman 1998)
2. The availability of materials
Since instructional materials are important in staff development, it must be
considered in planning. Planners should be aware of the abilities of the schools and
schools’ buildings. Marczely (1996) notes that “good programs can be sabotaged by
faulty air-conditioning, broken audiovisual equipment, missing refreshments…” (p. 29)
3. Time
Time is an important issue for teachers. This model’s activities should all take place
during the school time. It also should consider the load of teachers. The models’ activities
should be counted for in the school schedule. When teachers are tired or overloaded it is
more likely that the program will fail.
Planning for supervisory activities in Saudi schools is very weak. Since this model’s
success depends heavily on good planning, supervisors have to be aware of the factors
that lead to failure in planning. Koontz and others (Koontz et al 1984) states the reasons
why people usually fail in planning. The following are the reasons that can be noticed
easily in Saudi schools.
a. Lack of commitment to planning.
b. Confusing of planning studies with plans.
c. Failure to develop and implement sound strategies.

d. Lack of meaningful objectives or goals.
e. Tendency to underestimate the importance of planning premises.
f. Failure to see the scope of plans.
g. Failure to see planning as a rational process.
h. Excessive reliance on experience.
i. Resistance to change.
4. Objectives
Behavior is basically a goal-oriented. One of the shortcomings of the supervisory
activities in Saudi schools is the lack of clear and well-defined goals. According to
Hersey et al (1993) good goals should be:
a. Specific. It is not enough to set as a goal: “to improve instruction”. The area and
method of improvement should be clearly specified.
b. Measurable. Goals have to be measurable and observable.
c. Attainable. Teachers need to be able to reach their goals. However, goals should
not be so easy to achieve. Goad goals are challenging goals.
d. Relevant. It is important for the goals to be related to the their work at school.
III. Implementation
This stage is the real work of differentiated supervision. In this stage plans are
translated into actions.
Teachers are divided into two categories.
1. The new teachers, which includes all the recent graduated teachers, up to 3 three
years experience or the teachers who have profound teaching problems;

2. the experienced teacher, who have the experience of more than three years of
teaching.
Teachers in each school should sign their names in the option(s) they prefer. The
committee members should start with themselves. The supervisor should make sure that
the needed facilities and educational aids are available. He also should be ready to solve
any problem that might hinder the implementation.
If possible and more appropriate a group of schools can work together. The
supervisor, then, should work as a coordinator and form the task force from the members
of different schools. Each option group should arrange and undertake its activities by the
assistance of the committee. The committee should write a report about each option
group to the supervisor.
Since it is natural and expected that most of the teachers will choose the third option
(the self-directed option) the supervisor and the teacher should make it clear from the
beginning that the teacher’s participation and the extent that his participation indicates his
desire to improve himself will affect in his evaluation.
IV. Evaluation
Evaluation is an important stage in this model. Evaluation is essential for
maintaining the model and keeping it to its optimum. The following ways can be used in
evaluating the model:
Teachers’ Feedback
Teachers are encouraged to give their feedback about the model and its options. The
supervisors and the principals ask for oral comments and written reports about each
option and about the methods of conducing. These notes and reports should be looked at
carefully and analyzed by the supervisors. In addition to the benefit of these notes and
reports for modifying and developing the model, they will also give the teacher the
impression that they really have a say in the model.
Research on the students’ final results
Students’ learning is the ultimate aim of improving teachers. Any successful and
effective supervision model should contribute in improving students’ learning. If the
students’ result did not improve, that indicates that the model is not effective at least in
the important area of the students’ achievement. Then the supervisor should revise the
goals or activities of the different options.
The routine evaluative visits of the supervisor or the principal.
Supervisor and principals made a routine classroom visits to the teachers in order to
fill their appraisal report. These visits can give a clear indication for the improvement in
teachers’ classroom behaviors and teaching skills.
DuFour (1991) suggests that the Xerox Corporation model can be easily applied in
evaluating staff development programs at schools. The levels of questions and strategies
for answering each level are presented below:
Question Method of Data Collection
1. Did participants enjoy the training? Questionnaire
2. Did participants learn skills? Create a task situation for participants to complete
and have them evaluate their performance.
3. Did participants use their new skills on Observers determine whether new skills are being
the job? applied in the work place.
4. Did the program affect the bottom line? Collection of observable, tangible, verifiable facts
that show specific profit or performance results

(Elam, Cramer and Brodinsky, x986. cited by DuFour, 1991, p. 63)
Sparks and Hirsh (1997) conclude that,
It is no longer sufficient to determine the value of staff development
efforts by assessing participants’ perceived satisfaction with those efforts.
While participants’ satisfaction is a desirable goal, assessment effort must
also provide information about changes in on-the-job behavior,
organizational change, and the improved learning of all students” (p. 41)
The options of the model
The original options of the model that were proposed by Glatthorn will be used in
this model. However certain addition or modification will be made if necessary to fit the
Saudi schools.
Intensive development
This is a planned process for observing, analyzing, and modifying teachers’
classroom behavior. New teachers and teachers who have difficulties in classroom
teaching should go through this option. This option should be handled by the supervisor.
The Components of the Intensive Development
As proposed by Glatthorn, the intensive development option goes through eight
steps. (Glatthorn, 1997)
• Taking-stock conference. The teacher and the supervisor discuss the matters
related to their work together. A collective general meeting with the teachers of a certain
subject in a school or a group of schools will be sufficient.

• Pre-observation conference. In this conference both the teacher and the
supervisor decide the lesson to be observed, review the plan and decide the purpose of the
observation. The instrument for gathering data should be specified and explained to the
teacher.
• Diagnostic Observation. The supervisor observes the teacher to collect data
about the meaningful classroom interactions, in order to determine the teacher’s weak
and strong points. The students’ outcomes are a key issue in determining what to record
of the classroom activities. Video recording will be an influential means. Classroom
observation techniques should be employed carefully.
• Analysis of diagnostic Observation. Both, the teacher and the supervisor,
analyze the data. The supervisor should ask for rationalization for significant behaviors.
The purpose here is to help teacher always have goal-oriented behaviors, and criticize his
behaviors.
• Diagnostic Debriefing. The teacher and the supervisor analyze the lesson and
reflect on its importance for improvement.
• Coaching Session. In this meeting the teacher and the supervisor agree on
method of coaching certain skills that seemed to need improvement through the
diagnostic process.
• Focus Observation. An observation that focuses on a specific skill.
• Focused Debriefing Conference. A conference that reviews and analyzes the
findings of the focused observation.
Self-mentoring
In this option the teacher is taking the responsibility to mentor himself through
video taping his performance at the classroom. The aim here is that the teacher step back
and watches himself acting at the classroom. The supervisor should help him in
examining the instructional situations that the teacher goes through and evaluate them.
The process would take the following steps:
1. The supervisor introduces this strategy, explaining its goals. It should be made clear
that only the teachers will watch the videotape.
2. The teacher videotapes his class. He should put the camera in a palace where it
could capture all the classroom activities. The teacher might get the help of a
technician in setting the camera, but no one should be available during videotaping.
This is to assure that the teacher’s performance take its natural performance.
3. the teachers should watch the videotape at least twice. The first is to have a general
look at the teaching process. The teacher should write down any notice that he feels
remarkable or strange or need to reflect on. The second should be a guiding
watching. The supervisor should prepare certain issues or behaviors for the teacher
to watch carefully, for example, questioning process, using the chalkboard,
classroom management. These issues might be suggested by the supervisor, based
on his previous visits to the teacher, or they could be suggested by the teacher
himself. The teachers should write down any problematic aspect regarding the issue
in question, then reflect on them, trying to come up with some suggestions or
solutions. The supervisor might provide the teachers with some questions to answer,
such as, how many times did you ask a student from the first raw? Did you give
students enough time to think about the answer? Did you consider the individual
differences while asking the questions? Were the examples clear and easy to
understand? Was the warm-up stage effective in preparing students for the new
lesson?
4. the teacher then write a brief report about the lesson and how did he notice about
his behavior and what things that he is going to change.
Cooperative Professional Development
This should be the core of this model activities. The supervisor should make
teachers feel that they are professionals and that they should develop themselves by
themselves. Teachers should see it as part of their career to work together for
improvement. Teachers often learn best from their colleagues, thus they should be
encouraged to look at each other as source of information and assistance. This option
should be handled by both the supervisor and the principal.
Forms of Cooperative Development
Professional dialogues
Professional dialogues in this model have many forms. Each school or group of
schools arranges their professional dialogues. They include: small group discussion,
lectures, seminars, and workshops. Most of these dialogues are utilized in supervisory
activities in Saudi schools. They need to be organized and carefully planned. The
principal should be held responsible for directly managing this option. The supervisor
asks for a schedule for these dialogues at the third week of the term. At least, two
professional dialogues should take place in each term. Topics are suggested by teachers,
in order to have their commitment and effective participation, and to be very relevance as
well.
Curriculum Development
Teachers are the real ones who deal with the curriculum in reality. They should
have an input in it. Though Saudi educational system is a centralized system, curriculum
developers always solicit the teachers’ opinions, ideas, and suggestions. Teachers should
be encouraged to study and critique curricula. These studies or critiques could be
included in the topics of the professional dialogues meetings.
Furthermore, teachers have a wide space for creativity and modification while
implementing the Ministry curriculum. They have the freedom to add extracurricular
activities, and also they can create their own activities that fit in teaching that curriculum.
Teachers must feel that their creativity is worthwhile to their teaching.
Peer Coaching
The main assumption in peer coaching is “that teaching is a professional act and
that coaches support teachers in becoming more resourceful, informed, and skillful
professionals” (Costa and Garmston,(1994) p. 5). “Joyce and showers (1983) seems to
imply that for teachers to gain mastery over a new teaching protocol, considerable
training, and carefully monitored trial and error efforts are required. That is hardly what
teachers experience in a supervisory episode.” (Glanz, and Neville, 1997 p.6)
According to Gottesman and Jennings (1994) peer coaching is “a five-steps
framework designed for one professional educator to ask another professional to observe
classroom performance in a nonjudgmental, nonevaluative way so that performance can
be improve.” (p. 7)
Action Research
This form needs the teachers to have enough time and a good background in
research methods, and a strong commitment. According to Marczely (1996), research
supports the opinion that classroom teachers can be effective researchers. He states that
“Real teachers in real classrooms have made significant research findings” (p38). “Action
research is an option that can represent an individual initiative or a collaborative effort as
pairs or teams of teachers work together to solve a problem” (Sergiovanni & Starratt
1993, p. 292).
Zepeda (1999) states that the action research as staff development has the following
benefits:
1. The opportunity to collaborate with one another.
2. The development of a forum where interested members of the community can
learn together.
3. Learning opportunities that do not attempt to influence teachers towards a
predetermined point of view.
4. The opportunity to give emotional support to one another.
5. Data-driven decision-making
6. More readily accepted change.
Furthermore, the teachers will have the feeling and confidence that they are
professionals and that they have the ability to discover and explore their problems at
work and come up with proper solutions. Also, as a result, teachers will find themselves
automatically referring to professional references and trying to keep up with the new
research in their fields.
Guided Readings
This option was not mentioned in Glatthorn’s Model. However, this paper claims
that it is a very important option for supervisory system in Saudi schools. Guided reading
means that the supervisor or the principal choose some readings – small books, chapters,
or magazine articles –, photocopy them, and distribute them to the teachers or a group of
teachers. These materials must have a goal. They should not be selected randomly, but
rather serve certain areas in teachers’ development. They also could serve as starting
points for discussions in other activities. The important thing in this strategy is that it
should be ongoing and purposeful process. It should aim to three main goals:
1. Renew and refresh old knowledge base. Most of the educational innovations
and new skills are based on old educational principles and assumptions. Recalling these
assumptions and principles is very important for improvement.
2. Provide teachers with theoretical background for new innovations.
3. Provide teachers with new information in their field.
Self-Directed Development
Unlike the other professionals, teachers are rarely given the opportunity to choose
and manage their professional development activities. As professionals, all teachers
should be encouraged in participating in this option.
The supervisor role here is to draw guidelines for the teacher’s growth. There
should be certain topics that every teacher should be aware of. These topics will include
issues like: educational psychology, classroom management, educational technology, and
teaching models. The supervisor should set general guidelines for all teachers and make a
space for modifying these guidelines for certain teachers if needed. Teachers would be
supposed to provide some sort of documentation, such as a short report about their
activity, or a list of their readings (Sergiovanni & Starratt 1993).
Goals are very essential for this option success. The supervisor, or the principal,
should make sure that these goals help in improving instruction in general. This option
should be looked at as a means not an end in itself. Teachers should be encouraged to
translate what they read and study in their classrooms. Suitable and accessible references,
including educational periodicals, research papers, and Internet sites should be also
recommended.
Principal’s Role
In this model the school principal, as the school leader, plays an essential role. He
should work as the coordinator for the cooperative professional development activities.
Principals are key to any meaningful staff development program. Baloche (1998. cited by
Zepeda, 1999, p32) suggests that principals:
1. Believe, from the beginning, that people have the potential and desire to
succeed, then support them.
2. Build on a person’s strength.
3. Provide their staff with feed back- encouragement, praise, and positive criticism
– to help them grow.
4. Build team spirit through retreats, cooperative effort, and brainstorming
sessions.
5. Set high standards and praise the results; teachers will be proud of their
organization.
6. Remove obstacles to teachers’ success by providing the necessary resources.
7. Encourage teachers to take risk, to step out, and try something new.
8. Make work exciting with a relaxed, positive attitude.
9. Let people see the results of their work praised.
10. Listen carefully.
The principal has to launch the potential of his people. As an instructional leader the
principal should make a strong resolve to create and sustain the conditions needed to the
staff development programs’ success.

Summary
In this chapter a suggested model of differentiated supervision was presented. It was
based on Glatthorn’s model. However, some changes and additions have been introduced.
For its importance to applying this model in Saudi schools, the role of the principal was
also clarified.
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Glatthorn’s differentiated supervision is one of the supervision approaches that have
appeared in recent years. It is a flexible and inclusive approach. In addition, it gives
variety of options for the supervisor to choose. Also, it can be easily modified to suit any
school situation. This paper has proposed a model that is hoped to suits the Saudi schools.
This model of differentiated supervision seems to be applicable in Saudi schools for
the following reasons:
1. It provides teachers and supervisors with different options.
2. It is flexible, and can be modified to fit the different schools’ situations.
3. It capitalizes almost all the teachers’ means of growth, and creates a learning
climate at school.
4. it reduces the actual supervisor engagement in real work and gives him more
time for thinking, planning and supervising.
5. Legally speaking, teachers’ situation in Saudi schools is suitable for
implementing this model.
Recommendation:
1. Doing more research about the supervisory practices in Saudi schools
2. Making in-depth evaluative studies for the supervisory system in Saudi schools.
3. Experimenting this model (or developed version of it) in Saudi schools.
4. Making use of the studies made on the supervisory systems and models in the
USA.
5. Developing a parallel model for developing supervisors and principals.

References
Adwani, S. H. (1981). The Relationship Between Teacher and supervisor as
Perceived by teachers, supervisors, and Principals in Secondary Schools in Saudi Arabia.
University of Oregon. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of
Al-Tuwaijri, S. (1985) The Relationship Between the Ideal and Actual Supervisory
Practices as Perceived by Supervisors in Saudi Arabia. University of Oregon.
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
DuFour, R. (1991). The Principal as Staff Developer. Bloomington :National
Educational Services.
Cogan, M. L. (1973). The Clinical Supervision. Boston: Houghton Muffin
Company.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1984) Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria :Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Glatthorn, A. A. (1990), Supervisory Leadership. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,
Forseman and Company.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1997), Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria :Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Glickman, C. D. et al. (1998) Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental
Approach. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1993). Management of Organizational Behavior:
Utilizing Human Resources. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall

Jailall, Jerry, (1998). Differentiated Supervision Revisited: Towards the
Development of an Effective Supervisory Model to Promote Teacher Growth and
instructional Improvement. East Carolina University.
Marczely, Bernadette, (1996). Personalizing Professional Growth. Thousand Oak:
Corwin Press.
Ministry of Education (Saudi Arabia). (1998). Supervisor’s Guide (Arabic). Riyadh:
Ministry of Education
Rodriguez Sam and Johnston Kathey.(1986), Staff Development through a collegial
support Group Model. Zumwalt (Edit). Improving Teaching. Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development (ASCD): Alexandria.
Sergiovanni, Thomas J. and Starratt, Robert J. (1993). Supervision: A Redefinition.
New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Spark, Dennis and Hirsh, Stephanie, (1997). A New Vision for Staff development.
ASCD: Alexandria.
Starratt, Robert, (1997). Glanz, Jeffrey and Neville, Richard F. (Edit.) Educational
Supervision,. Should Supervision be Abolished? Norwood: Chritopher-Gorden Pbulisher,
Inc.
Wood, Fred H. et al. (1981). Staff Development/ Organization Development.
Designing effective staff development programs. Dillon-Peterson, Betty (edit).
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD): Alexandria
Zepeda, Sally, J. (1999). Staff Development: Practices that promote Leadership in
Learning Communities. Larchmont: Eye On Education.

Master Seminar Paper

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Master Seminar Paper

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

A Differentiated Supervision Model 1

A Differentiated Supervision Model for Saudi Schools

A Master Research Project

Presented to Dr. Ralph Martin

Department of Teacher Education

In Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Education in

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION............................................................................4

The Paper’s Question.....................................................................................................6

The Procedure ............................................................................................................6

Differentiated Supervision .............................................................................................7

CHAPTER TWO: DIFFERENTIATED SUPERVISION...........................................11

Components of Differentiated Supervision .............................................................11

Intensive development .........................................................................................11

Cooperative Professional Development...............................................................13

Self-directed development ...................................................................................14

The organization ..................................................................................................14

Supervisors cannot do everything alone ..............................................................15

Individual differences among teachers ................................................................15

CHAPTER THREE: SUPERVISION IN SAUDI SCHOOLS....................................17

Supervisory System in Saudi Schools: Background................................................17

Principals’ Role in Staff development .....................................................................20

CHAPTER FOUR: A SUGGESTED MODEL ...........................................................21

The options of the model .....................................................................................32

Intensive development .........................................................................................32

Cooperative Professional Development...............................................................35

Self-Directed Development .................................................................................38

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................43

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

transmitting certain amount of information for a certain method of teaching, supervision

Finding mistakes was, then, the way for improving instruction.

The clinical supervision is influenced by the behaviorist view of focusing on the

developmental stage. Supervisors working with teachers at a low level of conceptual

those at a high level, nondirective (Glickman et. al., 1998).

Differentiated Supervision is among the latest approaches of supervision.

Differentiated Supervision aims to carefully consider the individual differences among

they want (Glatthorn, 1990).

ultimate goal of supervision: improving instruction. Improving instruction, which

eventually improves the students’ outcomes, is the backbone of every supervisory

Starratt (1997) “there is no research that shows that supervision, as it is generally

practiced, results in substantial and sustained changes in teachers’ teaching”(p.6).

in relationship between them, poor staff development programs, ritual supervisory

the same time avoid their shortcomings.

countries’ experiences in the field of educational supervision. Supervisors in Saudi

of personal experiences and experimentations. Because supervisors usually are appointed

suitable for schools in Saudi Arabia.

The Paper’s Question

This paper is an attempt to answer the following questions:

1. What is the differentiated supervision as it was presented by Allan Glatthorn,

and what is the rationale behind it?

2. To what extent might it be helpful for the supervisory system/practices in Saudi

This paper is going to present Glatthorn’s model of differentiated supervision. This

This paper is concerned with the differentiated supervision as it was presented by

Allan Glatthorn in his books:

Gladthorn, Allan A. (1984). The Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria: ASCD.

Gladthorn, Allan A. (1997). The Differentiated Supervision. Alexandria: ASCD.

Gladthorn, Allan A. (1990). Supervisory Leadership: Introduction to Instructional

Supervision. Glenview: Scott, Foresman and Company.

In-depth critique of this model or of the supervisory system in Saudi schools is

beyond the scope of this paper.

Differentiated Supervision was first proposed by Allan Glatthorn (Glatthorn 1984).

premise in differentiated supervision is quite simple: Different circumstances and

different teachers require different approaches. (Daresh and Playko, 1995) In

differentiated supervision, as Glatthorn emphasizes, the term “supervisor” denotes any

professional providing the supervision services, including supervisors, principals, or