Identity,Authority,and the Heart of Supervision

Alfonso R. J. (1986). “The unseen supervisor: Organization and culture as determinants of teacher behavior.” Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April.

Alfonso R. J. (1997). Should supervision be abolished? No. In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 13–19). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Bakhtin M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Trans. Emerson C. and Holquist M. . Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bergquist W. (1993). The postmodern organization: Mastering the art of irreversible change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Block A. A. (1999). Even if we were all scholars: The teacher's authority. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 2, 337–351.

Blount J. M. (1999). Manliness and the gendered construction of school administration in the USA. The International Journal of Leadership in Education, 2(2), 55–68.

Boissevain J. (1974). Friends of friends: Networks, manipulators, and coalitions. Oxford: Blackwell.

Boissevain J. , and Mitchell J. C. (1973). Network analysis: Studies in human interaction. The Hague: Mouton.

Bolin F. S. , and Panaritis P. (1992). Searching for a common purpose: A perspective on the history of supervision. In Glickman C. D. (Ed.), Supervision in transition (pp. 30–43). Alexandria, VA: The Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Bowers C. A. (1998). Toward a balanced perspective on the educational uses of computers: Advantages, myths, and the responsibilities of educators. The International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1, 75–83.

Brown P. , and Levinson S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody E. N. (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56–310). London: Cambridge University Press.

Brunner J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cochran-Smith M. (1999). “Fostering teacher development: Challenges and opportunities.” Invited keynote address given to the Instructional Supervision Special Interest Group at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada, April.

Cox J. V. (1963). Supervisors’ perceptions of supervision. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 30, 20–27.

Dorr-Bremme D. W. (1990). Contextualization cues in the classroom: Discourse regulation and social control functions. Language in Society, 19, 379–402.

Duranti A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

GACIS (1974). Instructional supervision in Georgia. Athens, GA: Publishing Systems.

Garman N. (1990). Theories embedded in the events of clinical supervision: A hermeneutic approach. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 5, 201–213.

Glanz J. (1997). Has the field of supervision evolved to a point that it should be called something else? No. In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 124–130). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Glanz J. , and Behar-Horenstein L. (2000). Paradigm debates in curriculum & supervision: Modern and postmodern perspectives. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Gleick J. (1999). Faster: The acceleration of just about everything. New York: Pantheon Books.

Glickman C. D. (1992). Introduction: Postmodernism and supervision. In Glickman C. D. (Ed.), Supervision in transition (pp. 1–3). Alexandria, VA: The Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Glickman C. D. , Gordon S. P. , and Ross-Gordon J. M. (2000). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Goldsberry L. (1999). “A conversation on policies, practices, and preparation: Distinguishing supervision from general administration.” Paper given to the annual meeting of the Council of Professors of Instructional Supervision, Oxford, OH, November.

Gordon S. P. (1997). Has the field of supervision evolved to the point that it should be called something else? Yes. In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 114–123). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Gumperz J. J. (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In Duranti A. and Goodwin C. (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 229–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Erickson F. (1986). Tasks in times: Objects of study in a natural history of teaching. In Zumwalt K. (Ed.), Improving teaching (pp. 131–147). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Hargreaves A. (1984). Experience counts, theory doesn't: How teachers talk about their work. Sociology of Education, 57, 244–254.

Hargreaves A. (1998). “The emotional politics of teacher development.” Invited keynote address given to the Instructional Supervision Special Interest Group at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April.

Krajewski R. J. (1997). Can we put back the S in ASCD? No. In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 32–39). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Lotman Y. M. (1988). Text within a text. Soviet Psychology, 26(3), 32–51.

McWilliam E. (2000). The perfect corporate fit: New knowledge for new times. The International Journal of Leadership in Education, 3(1).

Migra E. (1976). “The transition from theory into practice: A microethnography of student teaching as a cultural experience.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Ohio.

Milroy L. (1980). Language and social networks. Baltimore: University Park Press.

Murphy J. (1999). Reconnecting teaching and school administration: A call for a unified profession. UCEA Review, 40(2), 1–5.

Noddings N. (1984). Caring. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Oliva P. F. (1989). Supervision for today's schools (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.

Pajak E. , and Seyfarth J. T. (1983). Authentic supervision reconciles the irreconcilables. Educational Leadership, 40(8), 20–23.

Sergiovanni T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Sergiovanni T. J. & Starratt R. J. (1998). Supervision: A redefinition (6th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Shreve J. (1999). Personal communication, December 13.

Smith N. S. , and Acheson K. A. (1991). Peer consultation: An analysis of several types of programs. Eugene: The Oregon School Study Council.

Smyth J. (1991). Teachers as collaborative learners: Challenging the dominant forms of supervision. London: Open University Press.

Smyth J. (1997). Is supervision more than the surveillance of instruction? In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 286–295). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Smyth J. (1998). Economic forces affecting supervision. In Firth G. R. and Pajak E. F. (Eds.), The handbook of research on school supervision (pp. 1173–1183). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Starratt R. J. (1997). Should supervision be abolished? Yes. In Glanz J. and Neville R. F. (Eds.), Educational supervision: Perspectives, issues, and controversies (pp. 4–12). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Maurice H. St. (1987). Clinical supervision and power: Regimes of instructional management. In Popkewitz T. S. (Ed.), Critical studies in teacher education: Its folklore, theory, and practice (pp. 242–264). London: Falmer Press.

Varenne H. , and McDermott R. (1999). Successful failure: The school America builds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Waite D. (1992). Instructional supervision from a situational perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8, 319–332.

Waite D. (1994). Understanding supervision: An exploration of aspiring supervisors’ definitions. Journal of Curriculum & Supervision, 10(1), 60–76.

Waite D. (1995a). Rethinking instructional supervision: Notes on its language and culture. London: Falmer Press.

Waite D. (1995b). Teacher resistance in a supervision conference. In Corson D. (Ed.), Discourse and power in educational organizations (pp. 71–86). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Waite D. (1997). “Super(postmodern)vision.” A paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, April.

Waite D. (1998). Anthropology, sociology, and supervision. In Firth G. R. and Pajak E. F. (Eds.), The handbook of research on school supervision (pp. 287–309). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Waite D. , and Ramires Fernandes M. (2000). Complicity in supervision: Another postmodern moment. In Glanz J. and Behar-Horenstein L. (Eds.), Paradigm debates in curriculum & supervision: Modern and postmodern perspectives, (pp. 190–211) Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Wertsch J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wiles K. (1950). Supervision for better schools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Wraga W. G. (1999). The educational and political implications of curriculum alignment and standards-based reform. Journal of Curriculum & Supervision, 15(1), 4–25.

Zeichner K. , and Tabachnick B. (1981). Are the effects of university teacher education “washed out” by school experience? Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 7–11.