The historical context of modern concept of supervision

Abstract

Lately, there has been an impetus on supervision of schools towards improving quality of education. The potential of supervision in bringing improvement in classroom practices and student success through the professional growth and improvement of teachers has been well documented and widely recognized. In India, the concept of supervision and the purpose it has acquired at the practice level undermines the significance of supervision in education as established by literature. Supervision in Indian schools is considered inadequate and weak due to persisting traditional inspectorial model of supervision. The current literature on supervision advocates modern concept of supervision which evolved, developed and is being practiced to a large extent in America. In order to fill in the gap between theory and practice of supervision, it becomes imperative to understand the context in which the traditional context of inspection and modern concept of supervision acquired specific nature and characteristics. The need to study the historical context is a precursor to understand and evolve the present supervisory practices to cater to the present scenario. The paper, thus, seeks to explore the history of modern concept of supervision in American context. The study also provides insights on significance of the history of supervision and the status of historical research on supervision. The findings suggest that the concept of supervision in America has been changing, shaped and influenced by a variety of historical forces and supervisory practices being followed in other realms such as the political arena, business and industry. The findings reveal the absence of a single, coherent and definitive history of supervision. The outcome of this work can serve to determine the possibility of the application of modern concept of supervision in the Indian context and in providing a suggestive frame work of supervision for the Indian education system.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.