Instructional Supervision, Coherence, and Job-Embedded Learning

  • Sally J. Zepeda
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 25)


Given the importance of teachers to student and school success, teacher learning should be at the core of school leaders’ work. To foster teacher growth and development, principals have to coherently link supervision, professional development, teacher evaluation, and other practices (e.g., peer coaching, mentorship, portfolio development, and action research) to meet the needs of adult learners. To be effective, these practices should be combined into a comprehensive, job-embedded support program for teachers. Although they all target teacher growth and development, instructional supervision, teacher evaluation, and professional development serve different purposes. Formative in nature and concerned with ongoing, developmental, and differentiated approaches, instructional supervision aims to promote growth, development, interaction, and fault-free problem solving by allowing teachers to examine their own classroom practices with and through the assistance of others. At the other end of the spectrum is teacher evaluation, a summative process more concerned with teacher ranking and assessment. Due to these differences in intents and purposes, instructional supervision and teacher evaluation are often in conflict, but should be bridged to bring coherence to teacher learning and development efforts. Effective and purposeful professional development is ongoing and long term and weaves together the supervisory cycles and other developmental opportunities through job-embedded learning. Coupled with instructional supervision and teacher evaluation, professional development coherently connects these processes through the practices embedded in the everyday work of teachers.


Professional Development Teacher Evaluation Classroom Observation School Leader Lesson Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Acheson, K. A., & Gall, M. D. (1997). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers: Preservice and inservice applications (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Ancess, J. (2000). The reciprocal influence of teacher learning, teaching practice, school restructuring and student learning outcomes. Teachers College Record, 102, 590–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnau, L., Kahrs, J., & Kruskamp, B. (2004). Peer coaching: Veteran high school teachers take the lead on learning. NASSP, The Bulletin, 88(639), 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellon, J. J., & Bellon, E. C. (1982). Classroom supervision and instructional improvement: A synergetic process (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.Google Scholar
  5. Birman, B., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 28–33.Google Scholar
  6. Bloom, G., & Goldstein, J. (Eds.). (2000). The peer assistance and review reader. Santa Cruz, CA: The New Teacher Center at The University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
  7. Blumberg, A. (1980). Supervisors and teachers: A private cold war (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  8. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burden, P. (1982a, February). Developmental supervision: Reducing teacher stress at different career stages. Paper presented at the Association of Teacher Educators National conference, Phoenix, AZGoogle Scholar
  10. Burden, P. (1982b). Implications of teacher career development: New roles for teachers, administrators and professors. Action in Teacher Education, 4(4), 21–25.Google Scholar
  11. Burke, P. J., Christensen, J. C., & Fessler, R. (1984). Teacher career stages: Implications for staff development. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, No. 214.Google Scholar
  12. Cogan, M. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  13. Corcoran, T. B. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development. Consortium for Policy Research in Education Policy Briefs. Retrieved Dec 14, 2007, from
  14. Costa, A. L., & Garmston, R. J. (1994). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.Google Scholar
  15. Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypothesis from a national commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5–15.Google Scholar
  16. Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6–13.Google Scholar
  17. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2000). Teacher as teacher educators. In G. Bloom & J. Goldstein (Eds.), The peer assistance and review reader (pp. 80–98). Santa Cruz, CA: The New Teacher Center at the University of California.Google Scholar
  18. Frost, D., & Durant, J. (2003). Teacher leadership: Rationale, strategy and impact. School Leadership and Management, 23(2), 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001, Winter). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glanz, J. (2005). Action research as instructional supervision: Suggestions for principals. NASSP, The Bulletin, 89(643), 17–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glatthorn, A. A. (1984). Differentiated supervision. Alexandra, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum.Google Scholar
  22. Glatthorn, A. A. (1990). Supervisory leadership: Introduction to instructional supervision. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  23. Glatthorn, A. A. (1997). Differentiated supervision (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  24. Glickman, C. D. (1981). Developmental supervision: Alternative practices for helping teachers improve instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  25. Glickman, C. D. (1990). Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  26. Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2010). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  27. Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision: Special methods for the supervision of teachers. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  28. Goldhammer, R., Anderson, R., & Krajewski, R. (1993). Clinical supervision: Special methods for the supervision of teachers (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College.Google Scholar
  29. Guskey, T. R. (1999). Moving from means to ends. Journal of Staff Development, 20(1), 48.Google Scholar
  30. Harris, B. M. (1975). Supervisory behavior in education (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Hess, R. T. (2008). Follow the teacher: Making a difference for school improvement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development: Fundamentals of school renewal (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  33. Kazemi, E., & Franke, M. (2003). Using student work to support professional development in elementary mathematics (Document No. W-03–1). Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.Google Scholar
  34. Knowles, M., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. (2005). The adult learner: The definite classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  35. Koppich, J. E. (2000). Peer assistance and review: Enhancing what teachers know and can do. In G. Bloom & J. Goldstein (Eds.), The peer assistance and review reader (pp. 19–49). Santa Cruz, CA: The New Teacher Center at the University of California Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
  36. Lindeman, E. C. (1926). The meaning of adult education. New York: New Republic, Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  38. McDonald, J. (2001). Students’ work and teachers’ learning. In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 209–235). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  39. McGreal, T. (1983). Effective teacher evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum.Google Scholar
  40. McLaughlin, M., & Oberman, I. (Eds.). (1996). Teacher learning: New policies, new practices. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  41. Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Moller, G., & Pankake, A. (2006). Lead with me: A principal’s guide to teacher leadership. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Google Scholar
  43. Mosher, R. L., & Purpel, D. E. (1972). Supervision: The reluctant profession. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  44. Murphy, C. U., & Lick, D. W. (2004). Whole-faculty study groups: Creating professional learning communities that target student learning (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  45. Pajak, E. F. (1993). Approaches to clinical supervision: Alternatives for improving instruction. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.Google Scholar
  46. Pasternak, B. A., & Viscio, A. J. (1998). The centerless corporation: A new model for transforming your organization for growth and prosperity. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  47. Peterson, K. D. (2000). Teacher evaluation: A comprehensive guide to new direction and practices (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  48. Ponticell, J. A., & Zepeda, S. J. (2004). Confronting well-learned lessons in supervision and evaluation. NASSP the Bulletin, 88(639), 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Desimone, L. M., & Birman, B. F. (2003, Spring). Providing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program. Science Educator, 12(1), 23–40.Google Scholar
  50. Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (1998). Supervision: A re-definition (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  51. Sparks, D. (1995). Focusing staff development on improving student learning. In G. Cawelti (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving student achievement (pp. 163–169). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.Google Scholar
  52. Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (1997). A new vision for staff development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.Google Scholar
  53. St. Maurice, H., & Shaw, P. (2004). Teacher portfolios come of age: A preliminary study. NASSP The Bulletin, 88(639), 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2009). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and technique (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  55. Tucker, D., Strong, J. H., & Gareis, C. R. (2002). Handbook on teacher portfolios for evaluation and professional development. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Google Scholar
  56. Unruh, A., & Turner, H. E. (1970). Supervision for change and innovation. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  57. Waite, D. (1998). Anthropology, sociology, and supervision. In G. R. Firth & E. F. Pajak (Eds.), Handbook of research on school supervision (pp. 287–309). New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  58. Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored learning to teach according to standards-based reform: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wei, A., Andrea, A., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2009). How nations invest in teachers: High-achieving nations treat teachers as professionals. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 28–33.Google Scholar
  60. Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: Professional development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wood, F. H., & Killian, J. E. (1998). Job-embedded learning makes the difference in school improvement. Journal of Staff Development, 19(1), 52–54.Google Scholar
  62. Wood, F. H., & McQuarrie, F. (1999). On-the-job learning. Journal of Staff Development, 20(3), 10–13.Google Scholar
  63. York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zepeda, S. J. (2000). Supervisory practices: Building a constructivist learning community for adults. In J. Glanz & L. Horenstein (Eds.), Paradigm debates in curriculum and supervision: Modern and postmodern perspectives (pp. 93–107). New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  65. Zepeda, S. J. (2002). Linking portfolio development to clinical supervision: A case study. The Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 83–102.Google Scholar
  66. Zepeda, S. J. (2005). Standards of collegiality and collaboration. In S. P. Gordon (Ed.), Standards for instructional supervision: Enhancing teaching and learning (pp. 63–75). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Google Scholar
  67. Zepeda, S. J. (2006). High stakes supervision: We must do more. The International Journal of Leadership in Education, 9(1), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zepeda, S. J. (2007). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts (2nd ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Google Scholar
  69. Zepeda, S. J. (2008). Professional development: What works. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Lifelong Education, Administration, and PolicyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations