A Continuum Model of

Arts and Sciences

SHEENALYN B. MOUAN
EM 507 – Supervision of Instruction with Material

1
 Why Evaluate Classroom Instruction?

Evaluation is important and crucial process

that is the parcel responsibility of the
instructional supervisor. Despite the problems
encountered in the evaluation of classroom
instruction, it is still used in many schools to:
1. Help the instructional supervisor know how to
assist teachers in their work
2. Assess the quality of instruction
3. Monitor teachers’ progress in instruction
4. Serve as basis for administrative decision
making (rehiring, retention, promotion, and
termination).
2
 An Overview
Evaluation of Classroom Instruction

Teaching
Perspective
•Art vs Science

• Beginning teachers
Evaluation of
• Marginal teachers
Teachers
• Expert teachers

3
 TEACHING: “ART VS SCIENCE” PERSPECTIVE

Teaching as “Art vs Science “ Perspective

“Science of teaching” perspective emphasize the notion that
teaching is a series of highly integrated skills that can be acquired
and developed.

“Art of teaching” perspective lies within the application of

knowledge and skills, taking place in the context of the unique,
situational nature of the classroom.

However, regardless of the teaching-learning process

perspective (art vs science), there is a consensus that teaching is
indeed, a complex and multi-faceted process.

One cannot truly become an effective teacher without

integrating both the art and science of teaching.

4
 DIMENSIONS OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING

A Continuum Model Of “Art and Science”

Reyes (2002) developed a Filipino model of
expert teaching based on a study of 69
expert teachers in the Philippines. The study
surfaced the following dimension of expert,
as well as responsible teaching:

5
 DIMENSIONS OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Expert Teaching
 Subject matter expertise
Classroom management expertise
Instructional expertise
Diagnostic expertise
Communication expertise
Rational expertise

6
 DIMENSIONS OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Responsible Teaching
 Learner-centered teaching
 Skills in developing students’ responsibility
for learning
 Skills in values integration
The Filipino model developed by Reyes provides a
continuum of the “art of teaching” and “science of
teaching” perspectives. It includes 2 sub-domains,
the essentials and enhancers.

7
 EVALUATION OF TEACHERS

Evaluation of Beginning Teachers

Cangelosi (1991) maintains that the most challenging and
difficult evaluations are those involving beginning and
marginal teachers. The first three years of their professional
careers are the most significant, challenging, and threatening.
It is during these early years that neophyte teachers try to
adapt to their new career and working environment.

Beginning teachers are generally occupied with feeling

of doubt and fear of inadequacy. These feelings are
compounded by heavy workload that neophyte teachers are
not prepared to handle because of lack of experience. These
problems and concerns will impact the evaluation of
classroom performance.

8
 EVALUATION OF TEACHERS

Evaluation of Marginal Teachers

The more problematic area is distinguishing between the
potentially competent and the misplaced individuals. The
misplaced individual will perpetuate instructional
incompetence that will be difficult to reverse as time goes by.
This has dismal consequences, because instructional
incompetence is disservice to the community and taints the
teaching profession. If misplaced individuals are allowed to go
on, they are prevented from seeking more satisfying careers
for themselves.
On the other hand, potentially competent teachers who
are not identified and given support, may ruin potentially
satisfying careers that may be a valuable resource for the
school and the teaching profession.

9
10
 EVALUATION OF TEACHERS

Evaluation of Expert Teachers

In order to reward and motivate teaching excellence,
Cangelosi (1991) suggests summative evaluations based on cost-
effective measurements to serve as bases for designing merit-pay
programs (based on levels of productivity), and career ladder
programs (schemes to enhance teachers’ opportunities for
promotions). The success of these strategies depends on how well the
evaluation instruments discriminate meritorious, excellent instruction
from a teaching performance that is merely competent.
Summative evaluations for expert teachers are designed to
identify exemplary meritorious instruction. This presupposes that they
are properly identified and screened. They can be recognized
through:
 Consistent high summative evaluations ratings on classroom performance over a period
of 3 years
 Endorsement from peers (colleagues and professional groups)
 Fulfillment of higher level credentials (i.e., graduate programs)
 Scholarly work (research and publications).
11
 EVALUATION OF TEACHERS

Because evaluation affects professional

satisfaction and income, it can also create
controversies, conflicts, antagonism and
perceptions of unfair treatment when expert
teachers fail to qualify for advancement
because of the evaluation results, or when
they think that others have been unfairly
promoted ahead of them.

12
 EVALUATION SYSTEM
• The choice of criteria is usually guided by the mission-
vision of the school, as well as accepted concepts
and principles found in the literature.
• As a rule, the evaluation system implemented in a
school is clearly defined in faculty and administrative
manuals.
• Evaluation systems include specific elements such as:
 Rationale – explains the nature, objectives and benefits to
be derived from the evaluation system
 Areas of evaluation – identify the different dimensions to be
assessed in addition to classroom teaching such as efforts
exerted towards professional growth, demonstration of
ethical conduct, community involvement and other
indicators of what may be considered as “going the extra
mile”

13
 EVALUATION SYSTEM
• Cangelosi (1991) contends that instructional
supervisors who try to help teachers improve their
craft should not be involved in summative
evaluations. According to him when instructional
supervisors are freed from the burden of conducting
summative evaluations, they concentrate on making
more effective and efficient in-service and staff
development programs.
• The evaluation procedure specifies the following:
 The data-gathering process (including the instruments to be
used)
 The feedback mechanism
 The needed documents to be submitted to support claims
about accomplishments and achievements.

14
 EVALUATION SYSTEM

 The schedule and frequency of the evaluation

 The identification of the evaluators (i.e. principal,
assistant principal, subject area coordinator)
 It also explains the way the different criteria will
be assessed and the weight apportioned for
each criterion

15
 EVALUATION OF CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION

Conclusion
Evaluation requires personal judgment which makes it a
difficult process whose results are oftentimes challenged. In
order to diminish the subjectivity of the evaluation, it is
necessary to develop instruments based on accepted criteria
that are specific and measurable. These instruments must pass
the test for validity and reliability. The clarity and specificity of
the measures plus the skill of the evaluator in conducting
evaluation will help insure the credibility of the process.
When the evaluation procedure is clear, well-
documented with specific guidelines, and fully understood by
all those concerned, conflicts that usually surround the
process are lessened if not totally avoided.

16
17
18
EM-507 Supervision of Instruction with
Materials Development

SHEENALYN B. MOUAN
Presenter

19